On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 02:30:36PM +0200, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> On Thu, 22 May 2014, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>
> >>The updated code change looks OK to me (but I've not actually
> >>exercised the new arm).
> >
> >Daniel, is it OK if I push this patch?
>
> No need to ask me for permission. I trust y
On Thu, 22 May 2014, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
The updated code change looks OK to me (but I've not actually exercised the
new arm).
Daniel, is it OK if I push this patch?
No need to ask me for permission. I trust you and your judgement, and if
there's more people giving their thumbs up I think y
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 04:56:33PM +0100, David Drysdale wrote:
> The updated code change looks OK to me (but I've not actually exercised the
> new arm).
>
> D.
Daniel, is it OK if I push this patch?
zek
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 21:01:47 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] ares_parse_soa_reply: Do not leak rr_name on allocation
failure
If ares_malloc_data failed, already allocated rr_name would go out of
scope.
---
ares_parse_soa_reply.c | 5 -
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Hi,
attached is a simple patch that prevents a leak in case malloc failed.
Found by Coverity scanner.
>From 2f475a5da65eec17c58c6e2b71bdbe8462be7139 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jakub Hrozek
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 21:01:47 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] ares_parse_soa_reply: Do not leak rr_name
