Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!

Bug 138456

Summary: Assert virtual destructor stubs for media-libs/smpeg-0.4.4-r8
Product: Gentoo Linux Reporter: hiyuh <hiyuh.root>
Component: [OLD] GamesAssignee: Gentoo Games <games>
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX    
Severity: enhancement CC: ciaran.mccreesh, ryan
Priority: High    
Version: unspecified   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---
Attachments: a patch to assert virtual destructor.

Description hiyuh 2006-06-29 04:33:33 UTC
The patch will be attached tries to assert virtual destructer stubs
for media-libs/smpeg-0.4.4-r8, just work around the compilation warnigs.
I'm not sure whether this patch is correct.
Comment 1 hiyuh 2006-06-29 04:34:45 UTC
Created attachment 90415 [details, diff]
a patch to assert virtual destructor.
Comment 2 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2006-10-06 19:55:52 UTC
i'd have to ask someone who actually likes coding in C++
Comment 3 Ciaran McCreesh 2006-10-07 07:41:48 UTC
It's not unsafe. The destructors probably should be virtual there to avoid resource leaks, although it's possible that the code doesn't use pointers to the base class and thus has no need for them.
Comment 4 hiyuh 2006-10-09 06:14:18 UTC
Fix typo
Comment 5 hiyuh 2006-10-09 06:49:13 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> It's not unsafe. The destructors probably should be virtual there to avoid
> resource leaks, although it's possible that the code doesn't use pointers to
> the base class and thus has no need for them.

Thank ciaranm for reveiwing my stupid patch.
I thought it silence warning like, "'class XXX' has virtual functions
but non-virtual destructor", though.
gcc (probably 4 or later?) so buzz its headers, but it's not treated error ATM.
Comment 6 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2006-11-16 20:16:18 UTC
hey ryan, feel like merging this in the upstream repo ?
Comment 7 Mr. Bones. (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2010-01-20 01:43:01 UTC
Any chance of getting this patch into the upstream repo?  Or should I just close this out as WONTFIX?
Comment 8 hiyuh 2010-01-21 00:54:02 UTC
(In reply to comment #7)
> Any chance of getting this patch into the upstream repo?  Or should I just
> close this out as WONTFIX?

for me, feel free to mark as WONTFIX.