Summary: | app-antivirus/clamav-0.94.1rc1 fails when make check under sys-apps/sandbox-1.2.18.1-r2 runs dev-util/valgrind-3.3.1 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Nathan Phillip Brink (binki) (RETIRED) <binki> |
Component: | [OLD] Development | Assignee: | Maurice van der Pot (RETIRED) <griffon26> |
Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | antivirus, net-mail+disabled |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Nathan Phillip Brink (binki) (RETIRED)
2008-11-02 04:44:29 UTC
re-assigning to valgrind maintainer. (besides that this looks like a good idea to me) I haven't looked at it yet, but how sure are you these are false positives? (In reply to comment #2) > I haven't looked at it yet, but how sure are you these are false positives? > I do not know for sure if they are false positives. However, I do know that ClamAV's running of the helgrind tests are "successful" when make check isn't run under sandbox. I also know they are successful when the suppressions I wrote are added to the defaults suppressions and make check is run under sandbox. I also know that make check doesn't work without my suppressions when run under sandbox. I'm not sure how sandbox works. Maybe there are problems with it that helgrind has picked up. But sandbox, which is a wrapper for certain calls to libc, may, like libc, do certain things which helgrind thinks _may_ be wrong. I don't know who to ask about the intricacies of sandbox. However, it would seem logical to me that if libc needs suppressions, libsandbox might need ones too. I'm sorry I didn't make my "reproduction of problem" instructions easier: Just download the clamav-0.94.1 source from clamav.net, extract and use ./configure; make; make check. Then do the same process, making sure to run make check under sandbox. This should make it easier for you to have the time to see the issue I'm having... I hope :-). Thanks for your consideration of this bug. before digging too deep, please try svn trunk of sandbox rather than any 1.2.x version I tested it with the svn trunk of sandbox and the issue disappeared, so this is the same as bug #235581. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 235581 *** |