r.in.gdal: Fix Resource Leak Issue in main.c

[ShubhamDesai]

This pull request fixes issue identified by coverity scan (CID : 1248588)
Used G_free() to fix this issue.

[nilason]

Please address CID1415647 and CID1415695 here too.

[ShubhamDesai]

Please address CID1415647 and CID1415695 here too.

these are from vector is it okay to combine it with fix of raster in same pull request

[nilason]

Please address CID1415647 and CID1415695 here too.

these are from vector is it okay to combine it with fix of raster in same pull request

They are from r.in.gdal too, try filter with /raster/r.in.gdal/*.c .

[ShubhamDesai]

Please address CID1415647 and CID1415695 here too.

these are from vector is it okay to combine it with fix of raster in same pull request

They are from r.in.gdal too, try filter with /raster/r.in.gdal/*.c .

for now i have added the proj.c from raster
is it ok if i create another pull request for one that comes under vector or do the vector in same file.

[nilason]

You can move these lines to the previous scope, after line 353. In addition you can move the definition/initialisation of loc_proj_units and loc_proj_info (L14) to the beginning of the else-statement starting at L153.

You can insert here, as in #5303, freeing of proj_units and proj_info after the else-statement (after L354).

[nilason]

Please address CID1415647 and CID1415695 here too.

these are from vector is it okay to combine it with fix of raster in same pull request

They are from r.in.gdal too, try filter with /raster/r.in.gdal/*.c .

for now i have added the proj.c from raster is it ok if i create another pull request for one that comes under vector or do the vector in same file.

It seems that the CIDs is mixed up, because of identical code in r.in.gdal, v.in.gdal, r.external and v.external. The same fix should be applied to all, but in separate PRs. #5303 is a good start.