I'm sorry.
> Thank you for comments, this is revised version of the patch.
The malloc error handling in dblink.c of the patch is broken. It
is leaking memory and breaking control.
i'll re-send the properly fixed patch for dblink.c later.
# This severe back pain should have made me stupid :-p
r
I'm sorry.
> Thank you for comments, this is revised version of the patch.
The malloc error handling in dblink.c of the patch is broken. It
is leaking memory and breaking control.
i'll re-send the properly fixed patch for dblink.c later.
# This severe back pain should have made me stupid :-p
r
Hello, I feel at a loss what to do...
> I thought that code was looking for 0xED/0xF4 in the second position,
> but it's actually looking for them in the first position, which makes
> vastly more sense. Whee!
Anyway, I try to describe another aspect of this code a the present.
The switch block
