Elia Pinto <gitter.spi...@gmail.com> writes:
> 2012/9/12 Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com>:
>>
>> Interesting, but it bothers me to make it enabled unconditionally.
>> At least, this shouldn't be enabled under GIT_TEST_OPTS=--valgrind, no?
> Sorry for the late response and thanks.
>
> No, setting MALLOC_CHECK don't require
> valgrind ...
You never said anything like that, and I didn't question it.
> and it considered a best QA to have the test suite with it
> defined always. If the test suite fail with MALLOC_CHECK, well, there
> is some problem, no ?
I never said using MALLOC_CHECK_ is a bad idea.
Let me ask the same question in a different way, as I seem to have
failed in the previous message.
If you are using valgrind to run tests, is it sane to also enable
MALLOC_CHECK? If you were testing "cat", would it make sense to do:
$ MALLOC_CHECK_=3 valgrind cat README
Because we are not interested in testing how valgrind (not cat)
uses malloc, we may be better off running
$ valgrind cat README
without MALLOC_CHECK_; it will reduce the risk of MALLOC_CHECK_
potentially disturbing what we really want to check (i.e. cat) by
triggering for something whose problems we are not trying to see
(i.e. valgrind), no?
That was my question.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
