==== Ian: Wed Aug 3 09:49:06 PDT 2005 =============================== Hi David, I believe this to be fixed now, after over 1000 iterations the memory has stayed constant, I fixed an issue yesterday that was causing a memory leak on the combo box and this seems to have finally fixed it, this fix will be in the next release you receive. Hope this helps, and thanks for the good test. ==== Ian: Wed Aug 3 09:49:06 PDT 2005 =============================== From: dhollen@mosis.org To: bugs@support.eiffel.com Cc: Subject: Re: EiffelVision_2/4074: EV_COMBO_BOX_IMP leaks objects allocated by `gtk_vbox_new' Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 11:35:18 -0700 (PDT) > I believe this to be fixed now, after over 1000 iterations the memory > has stayed constant, I fixed an issue yesterday that was causing a > memory leak on the combo box and this seems to have finally fixed it, > this fix will be in the next release you receive. I think it is better, but it is not fixed. Besides a number of single buffer leaks (at least some of which aren't true leaks because they are the result of a once function, to minimize memory allocation and speed things up), there are about 2 buffers leaked per iteration. These leaks don't show up in Eiffel/C memory output. However, the stack trace where the leaked objects are allocated is now different. It is: libumem.so.1`umem_cache_alloc+0x208 libumem.so.1`umem_alloc+0x44 libumem.so.1`malloc+0x2c libumem.so.1`calloc+0x58 libglib-2.0.so.0.600.6`g_malloc0+0x2c libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0.600.9`gtk_tree_view_init+0x10 libgobject-2.0.so.0.600.6`g_type_create_instance+0x52c libgobject-2.0.so.0.600.6`g_object_constructor+0x10 libgobject-2.0.so.0.600.6`g_object_newv+0x220 libgobject-2.0.so.0.600.6`g_object_new_valist+0x320 libgobject-2.0.so.0.600.6`g_object_new+0x68 libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0.600.9`gtk_combo_box_list_setup+0x104 libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0.600.9`gtk_combo_box_check_appearance+0xd4 libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0.600.9`gtk_combo_box_style_set+4 libgobject-2.0.so.0.600.6`g_cclosure_marshal_VOID__OBJECT+0x88 Hopefully, this will give you some clue. Could be a GTK+ bug (I'm using GTK+2.6.9). Dave