[PATCH 1/2] Remove dead code from python HBAC bindings
As Coverity noticed, we check for s != NULL in both if and else branches.
[PATCH 2/2] Handle allocation error in python HBAC bindings
This is kinda embarrassing, but the body of a NULL check was completely
missing.
From d4326a6d12557aae866e24b
On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 12:49 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> [PATCH 1/2] Remove dead code from python HBAC bindings
> As Coverity noticed, we check for s != NULL in both if and else branches.
>
> [PATCH 2/2] Handle allocation error in python HBAC bindings
> This is kinda embarrassing, but the body of
> On 07/25/2011 01:16 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > I'm not sure whether we're considering this acked or nacked. Are we
> > planning to push these patches as they are now, or should we be waiting
> > for the aforementioned wrapper around sysdb_store_group()?
>
> I think the wrapper is a more re
On 26.07.2011 13:49, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> [PATCH 1/2] Remove dead code from python HBAC bindings
> As Coverity noticed, we check for s != NULL in both if and else branches.
>
> [PATCH 2/2] Handle allocation error in python HBAC bindings
> This is kinda embarrassing, but the body of a NULL check w
On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 14:57 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
> > On 07/25/2011 01:16 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > > I'm not sure whether we're considering this acked or nacked. Are we
> > > planning to push these patches as they are now, or should we be waiting
> > > for the aforementioned wrapper arou
Jan Zelený wrote:
> Because I'll be on my vacation for two weeks starting tomorrow, I'm sending
> patches which outline how could the reference counter look like.
>
> Patches depend on some of my previously sent optimization patches.
>
> Please note that these patches don't optimize or change an
