From owner-freebsd-questions  Sat Apr  8 20:45:26 1995
Return-Path: questions-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id UAA00953
          for questions-outgoing; Sat, 8 Apr 1995 20:45:26 -0700
Received: from lurch (facgate.uconn.edu [137.99.15.81])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id UAA00947
          for <freebsd-questions@freefall.cdrom.com>; Sat, 8 Apr 1995 20:45:07 -0700
Received: from mork.engineering (mork.eng2.uconn.edu) by lurch (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA22684; Sat, 8 Apr 95 23:41:38 EDT
Received: by mork.engineering (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA25552; Sat, 8 Apr 1995 23:42:43 +0500
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 1995 23:42:43 +0500
From: hstrong@eng2.uconn.edu (Hugh Strong)
Message-Id: <9504090342.AA25552@mork.engineering>
To: freebsd-questions@freefall.cdrom.com
Subject: TIN Memory leakage
Content-Length: 534
Sender: questions-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


A while back I compiled a binary version of TIN from
the sources.  This binary has had a tremendous problem
with memory leakage that can gobble 16-20MB of virtual
memory with only an hour or so of usage.

My question is: Has this (obvious) problem been patched
for the port and the binary package available on
ftp.cdrom.com?  There appears to be a patch floating
around that fixes the problem on ultrix 4.4, and I
could post that if neccessary.

Anyone else had this problem with TIN?

				-- Hugh Strong
				hstrong@eng2.uconn.edu