Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 15:13:30 -0500 From: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> To: Tim Kientzle <kientzle@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Memory Leak Message-ID: <20040522201330.GU37882@over-yonder.net> In-Reply-To: <40AFA163.4020109@freebsd.org> References: <000701c4402b$a54e73d0$4206000a@stalker> <40AFA163.4020109@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, May 22, 2004 at 11:52:19AM -0700 I heard the voice of Tim Kientzle, and lo! it spake thus: > > The one problem I've had is that dmalloc.h redefines some standard > functions, which can cause gcc to complain. I usually just have a flag in my Makefile to enable dmalloc (adding a -D to the cc line to enable including the header file which is inside #ifdef's, adding the linking of the library, etc), which turns off all -W flags. gcc's quiet about it then. Personally, I find its insistence that free(NULL); is an error to be far more irritating. There's a config flag for it somewhere in the compile process, though. -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fullermd@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ "The only reason I'm burning my candle at both ends, is because I haven't figured out how to light the middle yet"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040522201330.GU37882>