Am Montag, 11. März 2013 um 15:33:36, schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[email protected]> > Le 11/03/2013 14:42, Kornel Benko a écrit : > > ==11211== LEAK SUMMARY: > > ==11211== definitely lost: 33,700 bytes in 189 blocks > > ==11211== indirectly lost: 59,454 bytes in 1,606 blocks > > ==11211== possibly lost: 15,783 bytes in 59 blocks > > ==11211== still reachable: 1,721,311 bytes in 8,392 blocks > > ==11211== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks > > > > ==11211== Rerun with --leak-check=full to see details of leaked memory > > > I see, I should rerun, oh well ... this may take a while ...
This time it took 2:30 h to end, and another 2 min to shut down.
The output of
# valgrind --track-origins=yes --leak-check=full --log-file ... lyx
is somewhat lengthy.
> I am not sure there is so many leaks to find...
Yes, but probably the biggest would be enough. Nonetheless, there is nothing
bigger than 15kb.
Does not explain, what I was seeing if run alone. Rerunning again, no such big
leak. Maybe, I should
add InsetBibtex::plaintext() again.
Interested in the valgrind output (267 kb)?
> Another possibility is to use the 'massif' tool of valgrind. It will
> tell you where the data is allocated.
I will try this one also.
> JMarc
Kornel
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
