Patrick Ohly wrote:
In the upstream libical certain functions return char * pointers into
memory stored in ring buffers. The caller must not free those pointers.
The drawback is that the life time of those strings is not predictable.
In the current Evolution libical, those same functions (not re
Chenthill wrote:
On Sat, 2008-09-06 at 11:02 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
Hello!
http://sourceforge.net/projects/freeassociation/ has released 0.32 of
libical on 2008-09-01. The KDE-PIM team has switched to that code for
KDE 4.2.
On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 21:49 +, JP Rosevear wrote
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 12:16 -0400, IGnatius T Foobar wrote:
> In what way does it break the userspace API? Is it possible that the
> API could be extended in such a way that memory handling depends upon
> how it's called?
Chenthill already provided the relevant links:
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/s
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 12:16 -0400, IGnatius T Foobar wrote:
> Chenthill wrote:
> > On Sat, 2008-09-06 at 11:02 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> >
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/freeassociation/ has released 0.32 of
> > > libical on 2008-09-01. The KDE-PIM team has switche
Am Sonntag, den 07.09.2008, 17:09 -0500 schrieb Isaac Karjala:
> I'm not sure if maybe this should go to the more general evolution
> list
The mailing list description clearly says "Discussion about Evolution
code", so the general evolution list would be much more appropriate,
yes.
> but I lost
On Sat, 2008-09-06 at 10:12 -0400, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> On Fri, 2008-09-05 at 15:16 +0200, Christian Persch wrote:
> > Both of these claims are false.
>
> Wow - that is bad. Reverting immediately, sorry [ and thanks
> for
> picking this up so quickly ! ].
>
> > e-spin
On Sat, 2008-09-06 at 11:02 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> Hello!
>
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/freeassociation/ has released 0.32 of
> libical on 2008-09-01. The KDE-PIM team has switched to that code for
> KDE 4.2.
>
> On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 21:49 +, JP Rosevear wrote:
> > On Sun, 2007-0
