On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 15:15:22 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Julien Cristau wrote: > > Should these use XNFasprintf? > > Certainly the previous code effectively did that (though by just SEGV on > writing to the NULL value returned by malloc, instead of an orderly abort), > but since the callers handle NULL return values already, it seemed like > returning failure was better than killing the server. Not that you can > get much farther into initialization if you run out of memory for module > path strings while just loading the modules. > Fair enough. Feel free to add my Reviewed-by: Julien Cristau <[email protected]> for this one too.
Cheers, Julien _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
