X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<4AF32131.6050204@gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:02:09 +0000
From:	Dave Korn <dave DOT korn DOT cygwin AT googlemail DOT com>
User-Agent:	Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: malloc overrides
References:	<4AF29EC2 DOT 2050808 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <4AF2D091 DOT 4030508 AT gmail DOT com> <4AF30A85 DOT 5070208 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <416096c60911051022obc335ceu15dc7ee0e487cb66 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20091105182402 DOT GU26344 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
In-Reply-To:	<20091105182402.GU26344@calimero.vinschen.de>
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Nov  5 18:22, Andy Koppe wrote:
>> 2009/11/5 Yaakov (Cygwin/X):
>>>>> extern void _exit (int);
>>>>> extern char* strdup (const char*);
>>>>   static int are_we_stuck = 1;
>>>>> char* malloc(unsigned n) {
>>>>       are_we_stuck = 0;
>>>>>     return 0;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> int main(void) {
>>>>>     strdup("yo");
>>>>       _exit (are_we_stuck);
>>>>> }
>>>>   FTFY.
>>> Funny, as I went to sleep last night I thought of just that solution. In
>>> practice, though, while it doesn't hang, it doesn't give the correct answer
>>> either.   As Corinna said, the malloc override needs to be functional, in
>>> that it allocates memory which can then be free()d.  So this isn't going to
>>> be quite so simple. :-(
>> Does the memory actually need to be freed?
> 
> Cygwin itself calls free, so the application implementation has to
> provide both.

  So probably just adding a dummy free() implementation will do the job?

    cheers,
      DaveK

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -