|
From: Jeremy F. <je...@go...> - 2003-02-10 22:03:50
|
Hi Nick, Some of your changes in errextra handling introduced a bug in memcheck and addrcheck. 86-mc-errextra (http://www.goop.org/~jeremy/valgrind/86-mc-errextra.patch) fixes the problem for me. J |
|
From: Nicholas N. <nj...@ca...> - 2003-02-11 09:02:04
|
On 10 Feb 2003, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Some of your changes in errextra handling introduced a bug in memcheck > and addrcheck. 86-mc-errextra > (http://www.goop.org/~jeremy/valgrind/86-mc-errextra.patch) fixes the > problem for me. Thanks... but I'm confused: AFAICT all MemCheck and AddrCheck errors do have an 'extra' part. What am I missing? Under what circumstance does the bug manifest? (I assume it's a segfault). N |
|
From: Julian S. <js...@ac...> - 2003-02-15 16:59:26
|
On Tuesday 11 February 2003 9:02 am, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > On 10 Feb 2003, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > Some of your changes in errextra handling introduced a bug in memcheck > > and addrcheck. 86-mc-errextra > > (http://www.goop.org/~jeremy/valgrind/86-mc-errextra.patch) fixes the > > problem for me. > > Thanks... but I'm confused: AFAICT all MemCheck and AddrCheck errors do > have an 'extra' part. What am I missing? Under what circumstance does > the bug manifest? (I assume it's a segfault). Did this one get resolved? Do I need to commit 86- to the repo or not? J |
|
From: Nicholas N. <nj...@ca...> - 2003-02-16 17:45:36
|
On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Julian Seward wrote: > > Thanks... but I'm confused: AFAICT all MemCheck and AddrCheck errors do > > have an 'extra' part. What am I missing? Under what circumstance does > > the bug manifest? (I assume it's a segfault). > > Did this one get resolved? Do I need to commit 86- to the repo or not? Yes, I will commit it; I'm justing waiting on Jeremy to answer a question about an extra argument in one function in his version. N |