On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 01:32:34PM +0000, Kyle Mestery (kmestery) wrote:
On Aug 30, 2012, at 10:23 PM, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 04:38:06PM -0400, Kyle Mestery wrote:
[...]
> Still there is something which looks wrong, if we don't have
a profileID
> why do we end up with "" instead of NULL ? I'm seeing various tests
for
> profileID[0] over conf/*.c and util/*.c , and that sounds wrong to me.
> if there is no data, store NULL ! Then test for profileID instead of
> profileID[0]. Then there is no risk of a crash because abscence of data
> led to NULL instead of an empty string, the code is more resilient !
>
> I expect a followup patch cleaning this up, but after 0.10.1 ...
> thanks !
>
Thanks Daniel, I'll work on the followup patch today.
No hurry, because I just rolled 0.10.1 out so that won't make it
(and it's not urgent). Giving 0.10.1 a try would be nice too,
thanks !
Daniel
--
Daniel Veillard | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit
http://xmlsoft.org/
daniel(a)veillard.com | Rpmfind RPM search engine
http://rpmfind.net/
http://veillard.com/ | virtualization library
http://libvirt.org/