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

Reply via email to