On 23/03/13 07:41, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > The proposed patch makes setting up a valgrind enabled fate instance > easier, and would allow to document it in a straight-forward way. Now > you say that the suppression file may not not apply to all, espc. > modern system. While true, I do not see this as a problem because > suppressing memory allocation mistakes that do not happen is not going > to invalidate the results of valgrind. This means that the patch still > has significant merits. > > I would like to hear what you suggest to achieve the same goal. At the > moment I read only a "reject, please go away". Can we do better?
I'd start by pushing the valgrind bits w/out the suppression, then we can bike-shed as much as we like about this suppression list. lu _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
