On Friday 01 January 2010, Dean Glazeski wrote:
> Yep, it's a memory leak. I suppose I was a bit hasty on posting it. Here's
> a new version that also checks the success or failure of the alloc_printf
> functions. I'm trying to think of a good way to determine if no matches are
> found for the g
>
>
> Fix the memory leak? Or is that command_help_show_list() thing
> freeing that parameter?
>
>
Yep, it's a memory leak. I suppose I was a bit hasty on posting it. Here's
a new version that also checks the success or failure of the alloc_printf
functions. I'm trying to think of a good way to
On Thursday 31 December 2009, Dean Glazeski wrote:
> Definitely the same thing. I found the bug and attached the patch. Turns
> out that the usage/help commands only supported single commands like 'reset'
> or 'init' but not anything like 'nand drivers'. This may not be the best
> way to build t
>
> This sounds something like what Freddie ran into:
>
>
> https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2009-December/013817.html
>
> https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2009-December/013860.html
>
> I think this needs to be improved before 0.4 ships; it's
> rather obv
On Thursday 31 December 2009, Dean Glazeski wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> As I was testing some commands, it appears that there is an extra bit of
> output that happens when usage text is supposed to be printed.
> Specifically, it has to do with the add_usage_text command:
>
> add_usage_text [...] ]
>
Hey all,
As I was testing some commands, it appears that there is an extra bit of
output that happens when usage text is supposed to be printed.
Specifically, it has to do with the add_usage_text command:
add_usage_text [...] ]
I can't find where this is happening, so I figured I would ask.
In
