From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] factorize pack structure allocation Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 20:22:36 -0700 Message-ID: <7vtzfi6vwj.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Teemu Likonen To: Nicolas Pitre X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 25 05:23:46 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KBLbm-0002iM-2l for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 05:23:46 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754895AbYFYDWu (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2008 23:22:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754852AbYFYDWu (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2008 23:22:50 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:58521 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754577AbYFYDWt (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2008 23:22:49 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B697816B4C; Tue, 24 Jun 2008 23:22:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1CFF116B4A; Tue, 24 Jun 2008 23:22:44 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: FC8F1E88-4265-11DD-B039-CE28B26B55AE-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Nicolas Pitre writes: > New pack structures are currently allocated in 2 different places > and all members have to be initialized explicitly. This is prone > to errors leading to segmentation faults as found by Teemu Likonen. Thanks. This is a much better equivalent to the "probably fixed with this" patch you sent earlier ;-)