Re: [PATCH 16 of 16] free intermediates in error path

To: mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16 of 16] free intermediates in error path
From: Rocco Rutte <pdmef@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 13:59:45 +0100
In-reply-to: <b195a368657041f8ad2a.1236973137@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-post: <mailto:mutt-dev@mutt.org>
List-unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@mutt.org, body only "unsubscribe mutt-dev"
Mail-followup-to: mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx
References: <patchbomb.1236973121@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <b195a368657041f8ad2a.1236973137@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-27)

Hi,

* Erik Hovland wrote:

# HG changeset patch
# User Erik Hovland <erik@xxxxxxxxxxx>
# Date 1236899608 25200
# Branch HEAD
# Node ID b195a368657041f8ad2a537dfeccf7b876b299c2
# Parent  dfcfb5a6d00dec73c1ffa91e46f7fe37fe2aea50
free intermediates in error path.


Doesn't that function contain more error checks where this would leak? I
didn't really read the code, but it looks like it always leaks in case
it's not set to SmimeDefaultKey.

Rocco

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 16 of 16] free intermediates in error path
  - From: Erik Hovland

References:
- [PATCH 00 of 16] Minoi defects in mutt hg HEAD
  - From: Erik Hovland
- [PATCH 16 of 16] free intermediates in error path
  - From: Erik Hovland

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 14 of 16] Use safe_fclose in pgpkey.c
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 03 of 16] Since contex_sb might be uninitialized, it is
Previous by thread: [PATCH 16 of 16] free intermediates in error path
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 16 of 16] free intermediates in error path
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread