On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote:
When we get the author name and email either from an
existing commit or from the --author option, we create a
copy of the strings. We cannot just free() these copies,
since the same pointers may also be pointing to getenv()
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Eric Sunshine sunsh...@sunshineco.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote:
When we get the author name and email either from an
existing commit or from the --author option, we create a
copy of the strings. We cannot just
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Erik Faye-Lund kusmab...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Eric Sunshine sunsh...@sunshineco.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote:
When we get the author name and email either from an
existing commit or
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 05:28:14AM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote:
static void determine_author_info(struct strbuf *author_ident)
{
char *name, *email, *date;
struct ident_split author;
- struct strbuf date_buf = STRBUF_INIT;
+ struct strbuf name_buf =
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 11:33:56AM +0200, Erik Faye-Lund wrote:
This approach has the added benefit of fixing the case where getenv
uses a static buffer, like POSIX allows.
Good point. I knew we could invalidate the pointer if setenv() was called, but
I didn't know that another getenv() could
When we get the author name and email either from an
existing commit or from the --author option, we create a
copy of the strings. We cannot just free() these copies,
since the same pointers may also be pointing to getenv()
storage which we do not own.
Instead, let's treat these the same way as
6 matches
Mail list logo
