Re: [Evolution-hackers] New patches for Inline PGP support

[Matt Brown <matt mattb net nz>]

On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 12:11 +0800, Not Zed wrote:
> Looking good matt,
> 
> I have a few comments, naturally :)

Of course, much appreciated :)
<snip>
> Anyway, I think it is just a matter of a little re-arranging of the
> code, most of the parts look good otherwise :)  Oh, remember to clean up
> properly in the failure cases, i.e. the if (!valid) code doesn't do any.

OK. Your suggestions all seemed blindingly obvious in hindsight. So
there are some new patches linked below that hopefully tidy all this
up. 

> I'm not sure about the text/plain formatting changes; I see why you're
> doing it, but it will affect the formatting, and add weird extra boxes
> in certain cases I think.  I guess i'll have to see how it looks.

I've broken this change out into a separate patch to ease testing.

One tiny new problem that has been introduced with the rearrangement of
code and has me beat. You'll notice at the bottom of the
efh_inlinepgp_signed function the call to free the generated mime part
(opart) is currently commented out. This is bad, however uncommenting it
leads to all sorts of nasty assertions and references to invalid objects
when trying to view a message that has nested inline pgp signed content.
If I leave the part unfreed then these errors all dissapear at the
expense of a memory leak. 

I'm absolutely stumped as to the cause of this, and I can't get valgrind
to give me anything useful, so I'm hoping that somebody will spot
something blindingly obvious I'm doing wrong and correct it!

Patches are at
http://www.mattb.net.nz/patches/evolution/eds-inline-pgp-v2.patch
http://www.mattb.net.nz/patches/evolution/evo-inline-pgp-v2.patch
http://www.mattb.net.nz/patches/evolution/evo-inline-pgp-formatchanges.patch

If it wasn't for the above bug I think I would be ready to start sending
them to -patches.

Regards

-- 
Matt Brown
matt mattb net nz
Mob +64 275 611 544 www.mattb.net.nz