perl-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stas Bekman <s...@stason.org>
Subject Re: time for 1.99_15?
Date Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:08:55 GMT
Markus Wichitill wrote:
> Stas Bekman wrote:
> 
>>> It seemed completely consistent to me. "nmake test" with mod_include 
>>> always leaks, "nmake test" without mod_include and partial tests 
>>> don't leak. Of course the long runtime of full tests has limited the 
>>> number of tests I could run.
>>
>>
>> But does the test fail or not? If it doesn't then t/SMOKE won't help 
>> here.
> 
> 
> No, it didn't ever actually fail.
> 
> t\perl\ithreads.........................Scalars leaked: 1
> Scalars leaked: 1
> t\perl\ithreads.........................ok
> 
> And since the FATAL switch is already used, I guess those warnings can't 
> be easily turned into failures?

No. Normally those happen after the handler has been run already. How come 
do you get them on the client side? Is the client leaking those? (doesn't 
make sense). Or is it something specific to win32, where server logs end 
up on the client side? Do you have those leak logs in error_log too?

-- 
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman            JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/     mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org   http://ticketmaster.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org


Mime
View raw message