Marcus Meissner <meiss...@suse.de> writes: > On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:56:06AM +0200, Jacek Caban wrote: >> On 06/06/12 11:52, Alexandre Julliard wrote: >> > Jacek Caban <ja...@codeweavers.com> writes: >> > >> >> This usage of list is broken here as well. list_init should be called >> >> before list_add_head (so calling it early in initialization code will >> >> fix both problems). >> > There's no reason to call list_init on list entries, it should only be >> > called on the actual list. >> >> Oh, right, sorry for misleading. I made wrong assumptions looking at the >> patch. > > So, Alexandre, is my patch right or wrong? And if wrong, can you quickly fix > it:)
The patch would work, but it's not very clean. It's better to avoid destroying objects that are not yet on the list. I have some more cleanups for that code that should address the issue. -- Alexandre Julliard julli...@winehq.org
