On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 05:44:08PM -0400, Rolf Campbell wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: >>As described, the memory leak is obviously not in cygwin. It is in >>windows. I was adding some clarification to the issue by changing a >>"may be" to a "definitely is". >> >>I think that this kind of clarification is more useful than your >>message, which essentially says "If we could figure out what was causing >>the problem then maybe it could be fixed". Personally, I don't see how >>that observation is useful. >> >>Having had some experience with this, I find it highly doubtful that any >>useful data will come from people posting their "me too" experiences. >>If someone wants to fix this then researching the Microsoft Knowledge >>Base might be a place to start. A google search might also be helpful. > >Could it be *possible* that cygwin leaves some memory allocated? Does >windows claim to free all memory allocated by a process when it exits?
Even Windows 95 should be enough of an operating system that it should free memory on exit. If that was not the case, I could easily write a program that would bring the system to its knees. Of course that is easy to do with Windows 9x in any event but I haven't heard about this particular problem there. >What about cygwin shared memory? I suppose it is possible that cygwin could be allocating shared memory. That would disappear when the last process which had a pointer to it went away. I haven't heard that it has been the case that memory reappears when all cygwin processes disappear. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
