|
From: Steven J. B. <ba...@ma...> - 2005-04-18 19:49:19
|
Dennis Lubert <pla...@in...> writes: > What is your valgrind version, linux version, compiler used etc. ? Valgrind - 2.4.0 Linux - Red Hat AS 3.1 Gcc - 3.2.3 > Is the line mentioned the last line in main() ? Correct. It's the closing curly brace of the program. > It looks to me like it tries to call some virtual destructor in an > object on the stack where the virtual pointer wasnt properly > initialized (happened to me once, was a compiler bug there) ? Or > maybe the objects that are destroyed (assuming you are using C++, > or what language do you use It's C. > at main() return do something weird ? Is this the full stack trace > ? If not, try with --num-callers and a high value. Try to figure > out in what object the uninitialized value is (if valgrind doesnt > tell you, try attaching with gdb or do printf debugging and print > pointers) num-callers=<large value> didn't help. Tried gdb, it doesn't say anything, just prints ??. Tried printf debugging but there are tons of variables. Thanks for your ideas though, anyone else? Maybe upgrade compilers? Steve |
|
From: Steven J. B. <ba...@ma...> - 2005-04-18 20:06:54
|
"Fred Smith" <fr...@co...> writes: > Are you using 'atexit()' in this program? No. Steve |
|
From: Nicholas N. <nj...@cs...> - 2005-04-18 21:15:02
|
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, Steven J. Backus wrote: > num-callers=<large value> didn't help. Tried gdb, it doesn't say > anything, just prints ??. Tried printf debugging but there are > Maybe upgrade compilers? If both Valgrind and GDB can't give you a proper stack trace, maybe the compiler is generating bogus debug info, or something like that. N |