On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 03:04:41PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 14:57:23 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > Oops correction I should look closer myself, that is in 2/7 not 3/7 . > > Anyways > > I still believe that using XNFstrdup instead would be better. I don't see > > why > > sloppy coding (lacking error checking is sloppy coding) would be ok in test > > cases. > > > I'd expect that either it's ok for these things to be NULL, or the test > will fail when they are?
correct, it'll crash on strcmp(). though xnfstrdup is simple enough to add though and it does add that little bit of value that I've just amended locally. Cheers, Peter _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
