From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Feb 1 14:48:23 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx.wgate.com (mail.wgate.com [66.150.46.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BD94737B402 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 14:48:03 -0800 (PST) To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Received: From MAIL.TVOL.NET (10.1.1.4[10.1.1.4 port:2194]) by mx.wgate.comMail essentials (server 2.429) with SMTP id: <34907@mx.wgate.com>transfer for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 5:42:49 PM -0500 ;transfer smtpmailfrom X-MESINK_Inbound: 0 X-MESINK_MailForType: SMTP X-MESINK_SenderType: SMTP X-MESINK_Sender: rjesup@wgate.com X-MESINK_MailFor: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from jesup.eng.tvol.net ([10.32.2.26]) by mail.tvol.net with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13)id D4Q57FM9; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 17:45:17 -0500 Reply-To: Randell Jesup Subject: Re: HOW to debug memory corruption efficiently? From: Randell Jesup Date: 01 Feb 2002 17:49:31 -0500 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii x-receiver: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG x-sender: rjesup@wgate.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <0000aff705b39407d2@[192.168.1.4]> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Darryl Okahata writes: > Purify's nearest (commercial) competitor is ParaSoft's "Insure++". >Perhaps things have improved but, when we last evaluated it a year or >two back, it was a LOT slower than purify (unusably slow for our >applications). I seem to recall 5-10X slower than purify (maybe more). >It can detect a few problems that purify does not, however (e.g., bad >arguments to printf()). Insure++ needs access to source code for best >results. I believe a Linux version is available. > > There is no open-source equivalent to purify (and probably won't >be, due to patent issues). The closest thing is "GNU checker", but >that's a pale, feeble dust speck compared to purify (assuming that you >even manage to get checker working). I'd also give the latest version of dmalloc a try. It also works fairly well, and includes protecting freed memory blocks to catch free-memory reads (I think) and writes. C++ may need minor source mods to track source file/lines for new'd objects. Overall it works pretty well. See ports and also dmalloc.com. -- Randell Jesup, Worldgate Communications, ex-Scala, ex-Amiga OS team rjesup@wgate.com "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safet= y deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message