[Evolution-hackers] Memory leak question in CamelImapCommand
Hi there, t almost sounds impossible but still, and that's why I ask. I noticed that the variable args in imap_command_strdup_vprintf is never freed. That would be a rather large memory leak (almost every IMAP command is created this way). So I'm a bit stunned that nobody else ever saw this one and I wonder whether I'm just not looking very good, or being confused or something (this happens often to me, so it wouldn't surprise me). The patch is of course a simple + g_ptr_array_free (args, TRUE); right before the return out;, right? ps. Adding Jeffrey in CC as I think he has a good idea how this function should work. -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://www.pvanhoof.be/blog ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Memory leak question in CamelImapCommand
On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 16:45 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: Hi there, t almost sounds impossible but still, and that's why I ask. I noticed that the variable args in imap_command_strdup_vprintf is never freed. That would be a rather large memory leak (almost every IMAP command is created this way). So I'm a bit stunned that nobody else ever saw this one and I wonder whether I'm just not looking very good, or being confused or something (this happens often to me, so it wouldn't surprise me). The patch is of course a simple + g_ptr_array_free (args, TRUE); right before the return out;, right? ps. Adding Jeffrey in CC as I think he has a good idea how this function should work. Hi Philip, I actually fixed that a few months ago. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=447753 Matthew Barnes ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Memory leak question in CamelImapCommand
On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 11:02 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 16:45 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: The patch is of course a simple + g_ptr_array_free (args, TRUE); right before the return out;, right? ps. Adding Jeffrey in CC as I think he has a good idea how this function should work. Hi Philip, I actually fixed that a few months ago. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=447753 Oh, strange. Must have been a merge problem of last week then ... Ok well, then I guess we both saw this :). Good. -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://www.pvanhoof.be/blog ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
