Re: freeze breakage request (gedit) #2

[Paolo Borelli <pborelli katamail com>]

On sab, 2005-03-05 at 19:57 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 19:52 +0100, Paolo Borelli wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > 	we need to revert http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=168262,
> > since the patch is totally wrong. My bad, sorry.
> > We had no report of problems in gedit, but the same things in yelp
> > caused problems (see 
> > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=169160)
> 
> OK. This should prevent a crash. 1 of 2.
> 

(dropped d-d-l as suggested by Murray)


Ok, it looks like I panicked a bit when Shaun showed me how bogus my
yelp patch was :)

gedit doesn't need to have the change reverted and that's why we didn't
have any reports of problems, gedit and yelp use two different while
similar functions:

yelp: gdk_display_get_name (gdk_display_get_default ()) which returns a
const.

gedit: gdk_screen_make_display_name (gdk_screen_get_default ()) which
really needs to be freed.

I don't know if/why one would be better than the other, they both
return :0.0 on my system.

I got tricked by the fact that they were originally cut&pasted since the
comment above the function is exactly the same.

So, to sum it up, my patch to gedit was correct and no change need to be
reverted while my patch to yelp was bogus. Sorry for the noise.


ciao
	Paolo