| Summary: | Suppresions files should be auto generated | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Developer tools] valgrind | Reporter: | Madhu M Kurup <mmk> |
| Component: | general | Assignee: | Julian Seward <jseward> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | wishlist | CC: | pjfloyd |
| Priority: | NOR | ||
| Version First Reported In: | unspecified | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Platform: | Compiled Sources | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Latest Commit: | Version Fixed/Implemented In: | ||
| Sentry Crash Report: | |||
| Attachments: | Patch to add the required functionality to auto gen suppressions | ||
|
Description
Madhu M Kurup
2004-04-17 00:41:50 UTC
Created attachment 5665 [details]
Patch to add the required functionality to auto gen suppressions
Gets my vote. I was thinking the "Print suppression ? --- [Return/N/n/Y/y/C/c]" could be extended to a new option to "A/a" add/append supression to the file. This patch appears a few years old now, does that mean its been rejected ? I think that this was mostly covered by commit 6c9a668a42b0861ca080d0ad0685d52bbfb77480 Author: Julian Seward <jseward@acm.org> Date: Mon Jan 10 17:24:47 2005 +0000 Add a new variant for --gen-suppressions: --gen-suppressions=all, which just prints a suppression for all reported errors without asking questions. git-svn-id: svn://svn.valgrind.org/valgrind/trunk@3219 There's no separate file option. Printing suppressions can be obtaines=d with -s. The sorting is (I think) based on the order of the suppressoons rather than the count. Personally I feel it's better to make suppression generation not too easy. Lazy developers will just use it to suppress everything and then be able to claim "no Valgrind leaks". |