Re: [Valgrind-users] Errors with gcc -static

[Tim P. <ec...@ec...>]

On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 11:16 -0500, Zachary Turner wrote:

> Assuming this assessment is accurate, is it best to deal with this by
> adding appropriate suppressions to the default suppressions file, or
> by modifying valgrind to be smarter and know that sbrk memory is
> always 0-filled?

Its best to test without statically linking, then release after linking
as you need.

Doing the reverse hides bugs you really _want_ to know about. Valgrind
is clever, but not psychic. Test with dynamic linkage, if that looks
good, you have already ruled out the noise that production optimizations
and static libs produce.

Then there's the corner case, when you are provided only with static
libs to link with. In that case, do what you can. However, that remains
a corner case :) 

Cheers,
--Tim