On 13 June 2013 13:35, Dennis Lan (dlan) <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:dennis.yxun@gmail.com" target="_blank">dennis.yxun@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
HI ALL:<br>
   Is it ok to introduce USE=dmalloc global flag? description as following<br>
&quot;dmalloc - Enable debugging with the dmalloc library&quot;<br>
<br>
current consumers:<br>
 1) net-fs/autofs<br>
 2) net-misc/directvnc<br>
 3) sci-biology/yass<br>
<br>
also<br>
 4) app-admin/conserver<br>
 5) net-nds/ypbind<br>
 6) net-fs/samba<br>
 7) net-analyzer/scli<br>
 8) net-analyzer/traceproto<br>
 6) net-misc/siproxd<br>
<br>
use dmalloc but controlled under USE=debug<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
Dennis Lan<br>
<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br>Questions for clarity:<br><br>1. I haven&#39;t used dmalloc before, what does this use flag do for me? <br>2. How does this use flag change the built binaries? does it:<br>   a) make no user visible changes, but adds code instrumentation paths which can only be seen/understood with a special visualiser<br>
   b) add output to TTY for the built binary? etc.<br><br>I&#39;m not arguing against global USE for it, I&#39;m just asking for a USE description that is more meaningful. <br><br clear="all">ie, alternatives might be: &quot;Add runtime debug output via the dmalloc library&quot; or &quot;Add runtime instrumentation for the dmalloc debugger&quot;, or something like that. <br>
<br>Because if it were case a), then I might be inclined to turn it on arbitrarily ( depending on how much it impacts performance ), just in case I happen to need it one day.  But if it were case b), I&#39;d be inclined not to turn it on arbitrarily, because I can see that would be irritating =)<br>
<br><br>-- <br>Kent <br><br>