RE: 1.5.19-4 & snapshot-20060529 : crash when freeing null std::string in dll (resend for attachment renaming)

RE: 1.5.19-4 & snapshot-20060529 : crash when freeing null std::string in dll (resend for attachment renaming)

[Williams, Gerald S (Jerry)]

Dave Korn (no, not THAT one!) wrote:
>   At least I didn't reply to his post and inadvertently quote
> the entire tarball in uucode/b64 though.  I've seen that happen!

In the body or the subject line?

gsw

RE: 1.5.19-4 & snapshot-20060529 : crash when freeing null std::string in dll (resend for attachment renaming)

[Dave Korn]

On 07 June 2006 17:21, Williams, Gerald S (Jerry) wrote:

> Dave Korn (no, not THAT one!) wrote:
>>   At least I didn't reply to his post and inadvertently quote
>> the entire tarball in uucode/b64 though.  I've seen that happen!
> 
> In the body or the subject line?
> 
> gsw


  Yes!


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

RE: 1.5.19-4 & snapshot-20060529 : crash when freeing null std::string in dll (resend for attachment renaming)

[Dave Korn]

On 31 May 2006 20:44, mwoehlke wrote:

> Dave Korn wrote:
>> On 31 May 2006 19:29, LenX wrote:
>>> (resend for attachment renaming)
>> 
>>   That was completely stupid and pointless.  You spammed the list with
>> 500k of duplicate rubbish just because you wanted to change the names?  
>> That's really SOOOOooo worth it for everyone else.  NOT!  FCOL, why didn't
>> you just send a short email listing the new names?
> 
> In all fairness, he probably did that because he received a bounce
> notification, just like I did when I posted a .bz2... not from the list,
> but from the over-zealous AV filter of someone *subscribed to* the list
> (say, I thought such bounces were supposed to go to the list admin, not
> the list poster?).

  Yeh, but OTOH the whole thing was 99% binaries, which anyone interested
could build themselves from the source, so it was a real department of
redundancy department situation!
 
> ...Meaning he failed to pay attention to where the e-mail came from and
> did, as you noted, spam the list with another half MB of attachment. The
> correct response would have been to a: ignore it (what I did), or b:
> send a follow-up suggesting that anyone that didn't get the attachment
> find it via the archives.

  That doesn't help all the people on dialup who already got it twice, though.

  At least I didn't reply to his post and inadvertently quote the entire
tarball in uucode/b64 though.  I've seen that happen!

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Re: 1.5.19-4 & snapshot-20060529 : crash when freeing null std::string in dll (resend for attachment renaming)

[mwoehlke]

Dave Korn wrote:
> On 31 May 2006 19:29, LenX wrote:
>> (resend for attachment renaming)
> 
>   That was completely stupid and pointless.  You spammed the list with 500k of
> duplicate rubbish just because you wanted to change the names?   That's really
> SOOOOooo worth it for everyone else.  NOT!  FCOL, why didn't you just send a
> short email listing the new names?

In all fairness, he probably did that because he received a bounce 
notification, just like I did when I posted a .bz2... not from the list, 
but from the over-zealous AV filter of someone *subscribed to* the list 
(say, I thought such bounces were supposed to go to the list admin, not 
the list poster?).

...Meaning he failed to pay attention to where the e-mail came from and 
did, as you noted, spam the list with another half MB of attachment. The 
correct response would have been to a: ignore it (what I did), or b: 
send a follow-up suggesting that anyone that didn't get the attachment 
find it via the archives.

-- 
Matthew
Doom doom dooM doo-DooM dOOm DOom doOM... DOOM! -- Gir