On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 17:17:41 +0200, Stefan Krah wrote:
> Ethan Furman wrote:
> > >>Any words of wisdom for tracking those leaks?
>
> Often the easiest way is to compile --with-valgrind and run the test
> under Valgrind (obviously).
>
> In the Valgrind output, search for "definitely lost" and ig
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 04/23/2014 09:06 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014, at 19:14, Ethan Furman wrote:
>>
>>> Command line:
>>>
>>> ./python -m test.regrtest -v -R3:3 test_tools
>>>
>>> Results:
>>>
>>> Ran 44 tests in 7.628s
>>>
>
Ethan Furman wrote:
> >>Any words of wisdom for tracking those leaks?
Often the easiest way is to compile --with-valgrind and run the test
under Valgrind (obviously).
In the Valgrind output, search for "definitely lost" and ignore the rest.
If that does not turn up anything, consider a bug in
On 04/23/2014 09:06 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014, at 19:14, Ethan Furman wrote:
Command line:
./python -m test.regrtest -v -R3:3 test_tools
Results:
Ran 44 tests in 7.628s
OK (skipped=1)
.
test_tools leaked [0, 2, 2] references, sum=4
1 test faile
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014, at 19:14, Ethan Furman wrote:
> Command line:
>
>./python -m test.regrtest -v -R3:3 test_tools
>
> Results:
>
>Ran 44 tests in 7.628s
>
>OK (skipped=1)
>.
>test_tools leaked [0, 2, 2] references, sum=4
>1 test failed:
>test_tools
>
> Any wo