> Adding the error nr in the Valgrind output would help, but I am not
> sure the improvement in gdbserver usage is worth always printing an
> error nr (and adding an option --with-error-nr=yes/no looks an overkill
> to me). Unless an error nr would be generally useful ? See e.g. how
> the 'loss record nr' is now used in 3.8.0SVN to give more details (e.g.
> the list of blocks leaked) about a leak.
> 
> In any case, it looks more logical (and might be sufficient) to have
> --vgdb-error compared to the nr of shown errors rather than to the
> nr of found (and possibly suppressed/possibly not shown errors).
> 
> Can you try the patch below and see if that is working and
> sufficient for you ?

Thanks for the patch.  I have manually applied it to 3.7.0 (not svn) and it is 
a big improvement.  The number seems to be offset by 1 from what I would expect 
though, eg. --vgdb-error=5 stops after detecting 6 errors.


One reason for printing the error number in the output would be to avoid having 
to manually count them if there are many.  Personally I think it would be nicer 
to always have the errors numbered to help navigating large amounts of output .

thanks,
Rob


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing 
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
_______________________________________________
Valgrind-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-users

Reply via email to