Hi,
On Mon, 2002-05-06 at 12:29, Kjartan Maraas wrote:
> Does this look ok for inclusion?
Because nobody said a thing...
> Index: gnome-icon-entry.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/gnome/gnome-libs/libgnomeui/Attic/gnome-icon-entry.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.33
> diff -u -r1.33 gnome-icon-entry.c
> --- gnome-icon-entry.c 1 Oct 1999 14:51:07 -0000 1.33
> +++ gnome-icon-entry.c 6 May 2002 09:27:35 -0000
> @@ -33,7 +33,6 @@
> #include "gnome-icon-sel.h"
> #include "gnome-icon-entry.h"
> #include <sys/stat.h>
> -#include <unistd.h>
> #include <string.h>
The unistd.h include should be needed indeed.
> @@ -84,7 +83,7 @@
> static void
> gnome_icon_entry_class_init (GnomeIconEntryClass *class)
> {
> - parent_class = gtk_type_class (gtk_hbox_get_type ());
> + parent_class = gtk_type_class (gtk_vbox_get_type ());
> }
Is the toplevel widget of the GnomeIconEntry a vbox ? If so, yes, the
parent class should be the one of the vbox.
> /*get around the g_free/free issue*/
> gchar *cwd = g_get_current_dir ();
> p = g_strdup(cwd);
> - free(cwd);
> + g_free(cwd);
Why not simply p = g_get_current_dir () and remove all use of cwd ?
I didn't read the actual sources, so bear with me.
Cheers
--
/Bastien Nocera
http://hadess.net
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part