() Felipe Sanches <[email protected]>
() Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:50:09 -0300
I think it is correct in the sense of being defensive coding
("let's avoid crashes and warn about strange conditions
reached"). But it does not solve the issue. Because I think
there must be a reason for that pointer to be null.
Thanks for the clarification.
Are we missing something?
I am still too ignorant to hazard a guess.
You can apply this patch, but we need to figure out later what
is wrong with this null pointer.
OK.
thi
