Add new macros to disable -Wdeprecated-declarations around a piece of
code, using the C99 (and GNU89) _Pragma() operator. Replace the
existing use of #pragma for this in gio, and suppress the warnings in
gvaluearray.c as well.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=669671
Unix and Windows gio GSocket behaves differently when the socket is
closed by the peer. On Unix, the client receives pending data before
receiving HUP. But on Windows, the HUP may come before, resulting in
unreliable and racy code. We should have same behaviour on all
platforms.
According to MSDN documentation: "an application should check for
remaining data upon receipt of FD_CLOSE to avoid any possibility of
losing data."
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=669810
For a number of reasons it might be useful to register the object paths
associated with a non-unique application so that the application can at
least field requests to its unique D-Bus name.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=647986
g_file_read() was returning G_IO_ERROR_IS_DIRECTORY when you tried to
open a directory on unix, but G_IO_ERROR_PERMISSION_DENIED on win32.
Fix that, and add a test to tests/file.c
Pointed out on IRC by Paweł Forysiuk.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=669330
This is useful when using certain D-Bus services where the
PropertiesChanged signal does not include the property value such as
e.g. various systemd mechanisms, see e.g.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37632
Signed-off-by: David Zeuthen <davidz@redhat.com>
==1265== 84 (8 direct, 76 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 793 of 827
==1265== at 0x4029467: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:467)
==1265== by 0x408479B: standard_calloc (gmem.c:104)
==1265== by 0x4084846: g_malloc0 (gmem.c:189)
==1265== by 0x4084B2D: g_malloc0_n (gmem.c:385)
==1265== by 0x4228A98: g_resource_load (gresource.c:253)
==1265== by 0x804A56D: test_resource_registred (resources.c:198)
==509== 700 (20 direct, 680 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 828 of 837
==509== at 0x402AD89: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:236)
==509== by 0x4084724: standard_malloc (gmem.c:85)
==509== by 0x40847C7: g_malloc (gmem.c:159)
==509== by 0x409B1E1: g_slice_alloc (gslice.c:1003)
==509== by 0x405396B: g_bytes_new_with_free_func (gbytes.c:173)
==509== by 0x405390D: g_bytes_new_take (gbytes.c:122)
==509== by 0x804A48C: test_resource_data (resources.c:174)
==29204== 11,456 (84 direct, 11,372 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 859 of 861
==29204== at 0x402AD89: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:236)
==29204== by 0x4084724: standard_malloc (gmem.c:85)
==29204== by 0x40847C7: g_malloc (gmem.c:159)
==29204== by 0x409B1E1: g_slice_alloc (gslice.c:1003)
==29204== by 0x409B227: g_slice_alloc0 (gslice.c:1029)
==29204== by 0x41936CF: g_type_create_instance (gtype.c:1872)
==29204== by 0x417CCC9: g_object_constructor (gobject.c:1839)
==29204== by 0x417C6F4: g_object_newv (gobject.c:1703)
==29204== by 0x417CC5A: g_object_new_valist (gobject.c:1820)
==29204== by 0x417C1DB: g_object_new (gobject.c:1535)
==29204== by 0x41E5E29: g_converter_input_stream_new (gconverterinputstream.c:204)
==29204== by 0x4228D38: g_resource_open_stream (gresource.c:363)
This bug was exposed by fixing the following leak in the resources test:
==29204== 11,456 (84 direct, 11,372 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 859 of 861
==29204== at 0x402AD89: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:236)
==29204== by 0x4084724: standard_malloc (gmem.c:85)
==29204== by 0x40847C7: g_malloc (gmem.c:159)
==29204== by 0x409B1E1: g_slice_alloc (gslice.c:1003)
==29204== by 0x409B227: g_slice_alloc0 (gslice.c:1029)
==29204== by 0x41936CF: g_type_create_instance (gtype.c:1872)
==29204== by 0x417CCC9: g_object_constructor (gobject.c:1839)
==29204== by 0x417C6F4: g_object_newv (gobject.c:1703)
==29204== by 0x417CC5A: g_object_new_valist (gobject.c:1820)
==29204== by 0x417C1DB: g_object_new (gobject.c:1535)
==29204== by 0x41E5E29: g_converter_input_stream_new (gconverterinputstream.c:204)
==29204== by 0x4228D38: g_resource_open_stream (gresource.c:363)
==29204== 7,192 (76 direct, 7,116 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 855 of 861
==29204== at 0x402AD89: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:236)
==29204== by 0x4084724: standard_malloc (gmem.c:85)
==29204== by 0x40847C7: g_malloc (gmem.c:159)
==29204== by 0x409B1E1: g_slice_alloc (gslice.c:1003)
==29204== by 0x409B227: g_slice_alloc0 (gslice.c:1029)
==29204== by 0x41936CF: g_type_create_instance (gtype.c:1872)
==29204== by 0x417CCC9: g_object_constructor (gobject.c:1839)
==29204== by 0x417C6F4: g_object_newv (gobject.c:1703)
==29204== by 0x417CC5A: g_object_new_valist (gobject.c:1820)
==29204== by 0x417C1DB: g_object_new (gobject.c:1535)
==29204== by 0x424E815: g_zlib_decompressor_new (gzlibdecompressor.c:270)
==29204== by 0x4228DD8: g_resource_lookup_data (gresource.c:422)
==28778== 700 (20 direct, 680 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 842 of 863
==28778== at 0x402AD89: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:236)
==28778== by 0x4084724: standard_malloc (gmem.c:85)
==28778== by 0x40847C7: g_malloc (gmem.c:159)
==28778== by 0x409B1E1: g_slice_alloc (gslice.c:1003)
==28778== by 0x405396B: g_bytes_new_with_free_func (gbytes.c:173)
==28778== by 0x405390D: g_bytes_new_take (gbytes.c:122)
==28778== by 0x804C2B1: test_uri_query_info (resources.c:435)
