Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 12:26:22 -0500 (EST) From: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu> To: "Eric L. Hernes" <erich@lodgenet.com> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.tfs.com>, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: new malloc/libc... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960315121150.2008F-100000@fieber-john.campusview.indiana.edu> In-Reply-To: <199603141423.IAA06343@jake.lodgenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 14 Mar 1996, Eric L. Hernes wrote: > Has anyone on the core team talked to Xinside about this? > They said that you (core) were working on it. If it's just > a matter of -lgnumalloc, or -lphkmalloc (which isn't in 2.1 in > any way shape or form right?) then it seems that they could just > use a better malloc and release it right? Or, is there any more specific info on nature of the leak? I compiled Motif 2.0 from source a week or so ago. I have a 2.1 system, but with phkmalloc in my libc. I have a copy of mwm linked with phkmalloc and one with gnumalloc. From informal observation using top, they appear to behave about the same; the RSS typically ranges from about 900K to 3000K and the VSS hangs out at around 900K. I have not observed any notable leakage. (Unless, of course, you consider motif itself to be a memory leak, but that is a different topic.) Some of the demo programs have memory management bogons that pkhmalloc gripes about. I have yet to go through all the test programs. -john == jfieber@indiana.edu =========================================== == http://fieber-john.campusview.indiana.edu/~jfieber ============
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.960315121150.2008F-100000>