On Sun, 2008-03-09 at 21:16 +0100, Diego Liziero wrote:
> 385 file = mail_transaction_log_file_alloc(log, path);
>
> Here a new mail_transaction_log_file is allocated before getting lost.
> Maybe I'm wrong, but, isn't here a path where
> mail_transaction_log_file_free(&file); should be called be
On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 2:07 AM, Diego Liziero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [..]
>
> 180 (124 direct, 56 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss
> record 3 of 5
> [..]
> by 0x80B59CB: mail_transaction_log_file_alloc
> (mail-transaction-log-file.c:51)
> by 0x80B3A86: mail_transact
On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 1:12 AM, Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's copying over itself, so it shouldn't break anything. But I fixed
> the error anyway: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.1/rev/8e014fd46e84
Thanks Timo. With this patch valgrind gives 0 errors most of the time.
Forgiv
On Sat, 2008-03-08 at 17:26 +0100, Diego Liziero wrote:
> Valgrind is stating that "Source and destination overlap in memcpy".
> I'm wondering if this code is just coping the same memory over itself,
> or if it is doing something useful.
It's copying over itself, so it shouldn't break anything. B
