On Wed, May 22, 2013, Phillip Hellewell wrote: > Looking at the implementation of CMS_get0_signers(), it looks like it > creates a new stack of X509 that I will have to free. > > Isn't the convention to use a "1" if the return values needs to be freed, > and "0" if not? So shouldn't this function be named CMS_get1_signers()? > (Note that CMS_get1_crls() is correctly named with a "1".) > > Probably too late to change it now though, huh? >
It's midway between 1 and 0 ;-) The STACK needs to be freed buty not each individual member. So you call sk_X509_free and NOT sk_X509_pop_free(). Steve. -- Dr Stephen N. Henson. OpenSSL project core developer. Commercial tech support now available see: http://www.openssl.org ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
