Unfortunately, the solution in that PR is flawed. Back to the drawing board.
Vid Mon, 25 apr 2016 kl. 18.39.24, skrev levitte: > So, listening to what everyone had to say, perhaps this PR is better > then: > > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/995 > > In message <a35573177bdb41388fb1d6c2670fefd6@usma1ex- > dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com> on Mon, 25 Apr 2016 17:45:05 +0000, > "Salz, Rich" <rs...@akamai.com> said: > > rsalz> > rsalz> > The 3-slot function is I think cleaner. > rsalz> > > rsalz> > I'll leave the decision of whether and when to support NULL > rsalz> > parameters to > rsalz> > the folks working on that code, but it is pretty clear that > rsalz> > one must not pass an > rsalz> > object one does not "own", such as one returned from a "get0" > rsalz> > function, to a > rsalz> > function that expects to take ownership of the indicated > rsalz> > object. > rsalz> > rsalz> Agree with both of those. > rsalz> > rsalz> After a "set0" call, set your pointer to NULL, it's no longer > rsalz> yours :) > rsalz> -- > rsalz> openssl-dev mailing list > rsalz> To unsubscribe: > rsalz> https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev > rsalz> -- Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org -- Ticket here: http://rt.openssl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=4518 Please log in as guest with password guest if prompted -- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
