From: "A. Sinan Unur" Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: malloc() bug? Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 05:22:12 -0500 Organization: Cornell University (http://www.cornell.edu/) Lines: 26 Sender: asu1 AT cornell DOT edu (Verified) Message-ID: <34813E53.EE1F5F31@cornell.edu> References: <65r720$f3t AT freenet-news DOT carleton DOT ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: cu-dialup-0024.cit.cornell.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk Paul Derbyshire wrote: > > "Tom Demmer" (DEMMER AT brain1 DOT lstm DOT ruhr-uni-bochum DOT de) writes: > > malloc() is pretty bug free and I never heard of SIGSEGVs inside > > malloc when the user code was bug free. > > I have. what is your point. the example below is a case of user code (in this case quake, _it_ is the user of malloc) having a bug. > On one 32-meg pentium I run Quake (the original, DJGPP-compiled) in a > W95 DOS box with 65535 DPMI memory, -winmem 24, everything is fine. On > the other computer with identical memory, I get SIGSEGV on startup at > the "mallocing 24,987,654" stage. Difference is, Quake 1.08 on the one > and 1.06 on the other (1.06 crashes). I suppose 1.06 might have a bug > though that they fixed in 1.08? -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A. Sinan Unur Department of Policy Analysis and Management, College of Human Ecology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA mailto:sinan DOT unur AT cornell DOT edu http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/asu1/