From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eygene Ryabinkin Subject: Re: Memory overrun in http-push.c Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 16:20:31 +0300 Message-ID: <20070301132030.GK57456@codelabs.ru> References: <81b0412b0703010015l5c91c68pd4748ae379db98bb@mail.gmail.com> <7vslcpux62.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <200703011040.35971.andyparkins@gmail.com> <20070228151516.GC57456@codelabs.ru> <200702281541.41164.andyparkins@gmail.com> <20070301051323.GG57456@codelabs.ru> <81b0412b0703010015l5c91c68pd4748ae379db98bb@mail.gmail.com> <7vslcpux62.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20070301120042.GD63606@codelabs.ru> <7vr6s9qi8b.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Cc: Andy Parkins , Alex Riesen , git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Mar 01 14:30:44 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HMlDK-0004E3-Bf for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 01 Mar 2007 14:20:54 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965043AbXCANUp (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Mar 2007 08:20:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965044AbXCANUp (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Mar 2007 08:20:45 -0500 Received: from pobox.codelabs.ru ([144.206.177.45]:64016 "EHLO pobox.codelabs.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965043AbXCANUo (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Mar 2007 08:20:44 -0500 Received: from codelabs.ru (pobox.codelabs.ru [144.206.177.45]) by pobox.codelabs.ru with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) id 1HMlD7-000GyZ-2j; Thu, 01 Mar 2007 16:20:41 +0300 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vr6s9qi8b.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=4.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_50 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: > In case it was unclear, I was saying that "attachment was more > annoying" than "diff output that does not follow the established > convention to be applied with patch -p1". Both I can handle, > but dealing with the former is more work for me. Ah, sorry, got it. -- Eygene