|
From: Tom H. <to...@co...> - 2009-02-06 19:18:34
|
Ross Boylan wrote: > On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 19:01 +0000, Tom Hughes wrote: >> Ross Boylan wrote: >>> On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 19:47 +0100, Julian Seward wrote: >>>>> invalid read. However, there is no indication of why it is invalid. >>>> Um, it says it is invalid because you are reading freed memory: >>> I believe those are 2 separate error reports. The addresses are >>> different, and the indentation seems to indicate they are distinct >>> items. Am I misreading? >> Yes - there is an instruction at address 0x40904A which is reading >> memory at address 0x5588760 that was previously freed. >> >> Tom > Thank you. So is the correct reading that the first block gives the > stack trace of the call that triggered the error, and the second block > gives the stack trace of the earlier code (whose execution is now > complete) that freed the memory? Exactly. Tom -- Tom Hughes (to...@co...) http://www.compton.nu/ |