On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi, Big, Fat Piggy Gimp Fans,
>
> here's a very small patch that should fix our huge leak:
[...]
> I don't consider this a clean solution but since it's a very small change,
> we should be able to evaluate easily if it is a correct fix. A better fix
Hi, Big, Fat Piggy Gimp Fans,
here's a very small patch that should fix our huge leak:
Index: app/gimpimage.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/gnome/gimp/app/Attic/gimpimage.c,v
retrieving revision 1.121.2.1
diff -u -r1.121.2.1 gimpimage.c
--- ap
Hi,
"Garry R. Osgood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What bemuses me is this "sink-but-not-really-sink" policy for
> layers and channels that prevails around 1.2.1 tile mismanagement, and
> which finds partial realization in layer_ref(). [layer.c-CVS-1.72.2.1 gimp-1-2]
> This brief little snippet
Layer deletes are a little funky: they don't get deleted when they are
removed from the layer list, since they get pushed on the undo stack.
They get deleted when the undo information is freed, ie when it
expires or when it is on the redo stack and an new action is pushed on
the undo stack, thus b
Hi, Big, Fat Piggy Gimp Fans:
June 01-2001 Marc Lehmann wrote ("Re: [Gimp-developer] Perl Server Problem"):
On Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 08:16:13PM +0200, Raphael
Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey, this looks like a serious problem!
>
> recommend to use an old version such as 1.1.4, then they
>
