Hi all,
I've fixed the segfaults plagueing cvs-head.
happy testing, y'all.
--
Paul Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NET FACILITIES GROUP GPG/PGP: 1024D/11F8CD31
The Ne
I've fixed the segfaults plagueing cvs-head.
I'm no longer seeing segfaults, but I'm still getting double free
errors.
Nov 15 08:49:56 nfs1 dbmail/imap4d[15979]: dbpgsql.c,db_free_result:
trying to free a result set that is already NULL!
When trying to upload a bunch of messages, however,
I've fixed the segfaults plagueing cvs-head.
I'm no longer seeing segfaults, but I'm still getting double free
errors.
Nov 15 08:49:56 nfs1 dbmail/imap4d[15979]: dbpgsql.c,db_free_result:
trying to free a result set that is already NULL!
Spoke too soon. If you push the imap server hard
Sean Chittenden wrote:
I've fixed the segfaults plagueing cvs-head.
That should have read *some segfaults* :-\
I'm no longer seeing segfaults, but I'm still getting double free errors.
Nov 15 08:49:56 nfs1 dbmail/imap4d[15979]: dbpgsql.c,db_free_result:
trying to free a result set that i
Sean Chittenden wrote:
I've fixed the segfaults plagueing cvs-head.
I'm no longer seeing segfaults, but I'm still getting double free
errors.
Nov 15 08:49:56 nfs1 dbmail/imap4d[15979]: dbpgsql.c,db_free_result:
trying to free a result set that is already NULL!
Spoke too soon. If you
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:31:34 +0100, Paul J Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm no longer seeing segfaults, but I'm still getting double free errors.
> >
> > Nov 15 08:49:56 nfs1 dbmail/imap4d[15979]: dbpgsql.c,db_free_result:
> > trying to free a result set that is already NULL!
>
> That's
My mistake, born from my lack of experience in using C.
I promise I'll stop after this, but if you're reasonably inexperienced
in using C, I would highly encourage you to think about using a garbage
collection scheme that way your time isn't spent hunting memory errors
and is instead spent de
Sean Chittenden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Experience tells me that if you're mixing const char *'s with char *'s
> in a list, you're going to be in for problems.
Ah, and in fact, nearly every use of "const char *" should really be
"const char * const" which protects both the pointer and what i
