Re: [patch] Defining apt sources using codename instead of suite

To: debian-boot@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: [patch] Defining apt sources using codename instead of suite
From: Frans Pop <aragorn@tiscali.nl>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 22:52:09 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] 200510232252.19986.aragorn@tiscali.nl>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20051023191416.GB8253@pluto>
References: <[🔎] 200510231711.32496.aragorn@tiscali.nl> <[🔎] 200510231829.57230.aragorn@tiscali.nl> <[🔎] 20051023191416.GB8253@pluto>

On Sunday 23 October 2005 21:14, Jens Seidel wrote:
> No, it is missing! You leave the function via explicit return without
> freeing your allocated memory first!
> But you mentioned that the condition in which you call return should
> not happen, so ...

Ah, Yes. I see what you mean now. Will fix that.

Attachment: pgpda3BCEu1SC.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to:

References:
- [patch] Defining apt sources using codename instead of suite
  - From: Frans Pop <aragorn@tiscali.nl>
- Re: [patch] Defining apt sources using codename instead of suite
  - From: Frans Pop <aragorn@tiscali.nl>
- Re: [patch] Defining apt sources using codename instead of suite
  - From: Jens Seidel <jensseidel@users.sf.net>

Prev by Date: Bug#178511: marked as done (mklibs: Misses some symbols?)
Next by Date: Re: Usability issues for the GTK graphical frontend, categorized and updated list
Previous by thread: Re: [patch] Defining apt sources using codename instead of suite
Next by thread: Re: [patch] Defining apt sources using codename instead of suite
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread