Bug 663355 – Leak in format dialog

After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.

Bug 663355 - Leak in format dialog


Summary:	Leak in format dialog


Status:	RESOLVED FIXED

Product:	Gnumeric
Classification:	Applications
Component:	GUI
Version:	git master
Hardware:	Other All

Importance:	Normal normal
Target Milestone:	---
Assigned To:	Jody Goldberg
QA Contact:	Jody Goldberg

URL:
Whiteboard:

Depends on:
Blocks:

Reported:	2011-11-03 20:23 UTC by Morten Welinder
Modified:	2011-11-05 07:03 UTC

See Also:
GNOME target:	---
GNOME version:	---

Description Morten Welinder 2011-11-03 20:23:41 UTC

Showing the second tab in the dialog gives:

==9604== 192 bytes in 4 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 11,425 of 12,365
==9604==    at 0x4C2683D: malloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==9604==    by 0x8F90B22: g_malloc (in /lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0.2800.0)
==9604==    by 0x54586AE: goc_polyline_set_property (goc-polyline.c:54)
==9604==    by 0x86F4B45: g_object_newv (in /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0.2800.0)
==9604==    by 0x86F59C0: g_object_new_valist (in /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0.2800.0)
==9604==    by 0x545446B: goc_item_new (goc-item.c:328)
==9604==    by 0x4FC4BD4: draw_border_preview (dialog-cell-format.c:1300)
==9604==    by 0x4FC6822: fmt_dialog_impl (dialog-cell-format.c:2340)
==9604==    by 0x4FC7548: dialog_cell_format (dialog-cell-format.c:2513)
==9604==    by 0x86EFD3D: g_closure_invoke (in /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0.2800.0)
==9604==    by 0x8701366: ??? (in /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0.2800.0)
==9604==    by 0x870ACA4: g_signal_emit_valist (in /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0.2800.0)
==9604==    by 0x870AE72: g_signal_emit (in /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0.2800.0)
==9604==    by 0x652A342: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libgtk-3.so.0.0.0)

Comment 1 Jean Bréfort 2011-11-05 07:03:35 UTC

This problem has been fixed in the development version. The fix will be available in the next major software release. Thank you for your bug report.