> On April 5, 2017 at 5:28 AM Paul Eggert <[email protected]> wrote: > If my assumption is wrong and > users prefer an error message when memory is low, the patch would make sense. > It's low priority, though, as the behavior is well-defined whether or not the > patch is installed.
Your assumption is correct, mine is wrong. I failed to recognize the proper NULL checks whenever tz is used later on. Please close the report and sorry for the noise. Tobias
