>At no point was there any assumption that the program I >provided was efficient. It was a proof of concept program to show how >to exploit the memory leak. I agree that placing the res_state >variable into the krb5_context is a good solution, and that creating >multiple contexts in the same thread is unneccessary.
I know you weren't trying to write any production code or anything. I was just pointing out, that if the memory leak is moved to krb5_init_context(), then the problem is solved for realistic cases. And I was just trying to say it wouldn't fix the problem in your test program and that your leak test would still leak. ________________________________________________ Kerberos mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/kerberos
