Re: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread Steffen Fiksdal
g it. Josh -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joshua Juran Sent: Wednesday, 16 November 2005 12:38 PM To: openssl-users@openssl.org Subject: Re: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup On Nov 15, 2005, at 7:29 PM, Steven Reddie wr

RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread Steven Reddie
Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Schwartz Sent: Wednesday, 16 November 2005 5:46 PM To: openssl-users@openssl.org Subject: RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup > There may be no portable way to handle TSD cleanup, but there is no

RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread David Schwartz
> There may be no portable way to handle TSD cleanup, but there is > no portable > way to do threading at all anyway, so I'm not sure what your argument is > there. Huh? POSIX threads are portable. There are even support libraries for WIN32. > I'm not arguing that any of this needs to b

RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread Steven Reddie
RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup > Dismissing leaks as one-off's is a pet peeve of mine. The notion of > one-off leaks in an executable is arguably passable, but becomes a > plain old memory leak just like any other when packaged as a library.

RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread Steven Reddie
David Schwartz Sent: Wednesday, 16 November 2005 3:02 PM To: openssl-users@openssl.org Subject: RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup > I understand about one-off leaks, but we're talking about a > dynamically loadable library when we're talking about OpenSSL.

RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread David Schwartz
> Dismissing leaks as one-off's is a pet peeve of mine. The notion > of one-off > leaks in an executable is arguably passable, but becomes a plain > old memory > leak just like any other when packaged as a library. Not if the memory is reused if the library is unloaded and reloaded.

RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread David Schwartz
> I understand about one-off leaks, but we're talking about a dynamically > loadable library when we're talking about OpenSSL. > What would happen if an application did something like this: > > for (int i=0; i<1000; i++) > { > hSSL = LoadLibrary("libssl.so") >

Re: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread Jonathon Green
hard crash when the > application terminates > > because the handler is still registered with the C > runtime library, > > but the > > code has been unloaded. > > If OpenSSL claims to be usable when dynamically > loaded, then it's a bug > in OpenSSL.

RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread Steven Reddie
at's loading it. Josh > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joshua Juran > Sent: Wednesday, 16 November 2005 12:38 PM > To: openssl-users@openssl.org > Subject: Re: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after clean

Re: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread Joshua Juran
: Wednesday, 16 November 2005 12:38 PM To: openssl-users@openssl.org Subject: Re: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup On Nov 15, 2005, at 7:29 PM, Steven Reddie wrote: David, If 36 bytes are being dynamically allocated and not being freed how is it not a leak? Steven Because it only

RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread Steven Reddie
unloaded. Steven -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joshua Juran Sent: Wednesday, 16 November 2005 12:38 PM To: openssl-users@openssl.org Subject: Re: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup On Nov 15, 2005, at 7:29 PM, Steven Reddie

Re: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread Joshua Juran
On Nov 15, 2005, at 7:29 PM, Steven Reddie wrote: David, If 36 bytes are being dynamically allocated and not being freed how is it not a leak? Steven Because it only happens once. Imagine that when you shut off a faucet, water drips out for the next ten seconds and then stops. That's no

RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread Steven Reddie
: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup > I use valgrind to check my code, and I can't seem to be able to free > up 36 bytes. So what? > SSL_library_init() allocates 36 bytes that I am not able to free using > the regular cleanup functions. Correc

RE: SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread David Schwartz
> I use valgrind to check my code, and I can't seem to be able to > free up 36 > bytes. So what? > SSL_library_init() allocates 36 bytes that I am not able to free > using the > regular cleanup functions. Correct. > The details: > SSL_library_init calls SSL_COMP_get_compression

SSL_library_init - missing 36 bytes after cleanup

2005-11-15 Thread Steffen Fiksdal
Hi! I use valgrind to check my code, and I can't seem to be able to free up 36 bytes. SSL_library_init() allocates 36 bytes that I am not able to free using the regular cleanup functions. The details: SSL_library_init calls SSL_COMP_get_compression_methods() if OPENSSL_NO_COMP is defined.