Svante Signell, le Tue 12 Apr 2011 21:46:09 +0200, a écrit : > On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 20:56 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Svante Signell, le Tue 12 Apr 2011 19:27:10 +0200, a écrit : > > > return -1 ; > > > } > > > /* If we reach here, "filename" is not a symbolic link */ > > > > And thus we didn't call realpath at all. I believe the free below > > shouldn't be done, it's probably only by chance that it doesn't segfault > > in your test (by being NULL by chance). > > Yes, we did not call realpath but the variable is still declared but not > malloced. Does that mean we shouldn't free() it?
Of course. > > > +#ifdef __GNU__ > > > + free (realfilepath); > > > +#endif > > > return openandconvert( filename ); > > > } > > OK, thanks for your comments. The biggest problem with malloced > storage, is where to put the free() statements. To do that you need to > follow the program logic and find out every statement with a possible > exit. This can be very difficult sometimes, at least I think so. That's programming... > Final version?? Seems good to me. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
