Description of problem: I've been writing an experimental static analysis tool to detect bugs commonly occurring within C Python extension modules: https://fedorahosted.org/gcc-python-plugin/ http://gcc-python-plugin.readthedocs.org/en/latest/cpychecker.html http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/StaticAnalysisOfPythonRefcounts I ran the latest version of the tool (in git master; post 0.9) on Io-language-20080330-8.fc17.2.src.rpm, and it reports various errors. You can see a list of errors here, triaged into categories (from most significant to least significant): http://fedorapeople.org/~dmalcolm/gcc-python-plugin/2012-03-27/Io-language-20080330-8.fc17.2/ I've manually reviewed the issues reported by the tool. Within the category "Reference count too low" the 1 issue reported may well be a false positive: I don't understand the Io code enough to tell. Within the category "Reference leaks" 2 of the 3 issues reported look like genuine bugs: source/IoPython.c:IoPython_import:ob_refcnt of '*pName' is 1 too high: the error handling path needs a Py_XDECREF(pName) source/IoPython.c:convertIo:ob_refcnt of return value is 1 too high the Py_INCREF(ret); appears to be erroneous source/IoPython.c:IoPython_call_int:ob_refcnt of '*pValue' is 1 too high I'm not sure if this is a bug or not Within the category "Segfaults within error-handling paths" the 3 issues reported look like genuine crashers under low-memory conditions. Within the category "Possible reference leaks" the 2 issues reported may or may not be bugs; I can't tell. Within the category "Returning (PyObject*)NULL without setting an exception" the 1 issue reported looks like a genuine bug: shouldn't this error-handling path set an exception? There may of course be other bugs in my checker tool. Hope this is helpful; let me know if you need help reading the logs that the tool generates - I know that it could use some improvement. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Io-language-20080330-8.fc17.2 gcc-python-plugin post-0.9 git 98d050a4691c4c6739341511d8a404adf0adfe6e running the checker in an *f16* chroot
Would it be possible to re-run this against the new version I just put in rawhide?
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 19 development cycle. Changing version to '19'. (As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 19 development cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 19 End Of Life. Thank you.) More information and reason for this action is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora19
This message is a notice that Fedora 19 is now at end of life. Fedora has stopped maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 19. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '19'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 19 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
Fedora 19 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2015-01-06. Fedora 19 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.