From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Feb 26  8:27:34 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from guild.plethora.net (guild.plethora.net [205.166.146.8])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9E0C37B401
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 08:27:31 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from seebs@guild.plethora.net)
Received: from guild.plethora.net (seebs@localhost.plethora.net [127.0.0.1])
	by guild.plethora.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f1QGRU610388
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 10:27:30 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <200102261627.f1QGRU610388@guild.plethora.net>
From: seebs@plethora.net (Peter Seebach)
Reply-To: seebs@plethora.net (Peter Seebach)
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Setting memory allocators for library functions. 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 26 Feb 2001 13:26:26 -0300."
             <Pine.LNX.4.33.0102261326160.5502-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva> 
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 10:27:30 -0600
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

In message <Pine.LNX.4.33.0102261326160.5502-100000@duckman.distro.conectiva>, 
Rik van Riel writes:
>> No, I just disagree.  It is useful for the OS to provide a hook for
>> memory which is *known to work* - and that is the environment C specifies.

>Send patches.

I may some day.  It's not very high on my priority list; I'd probably try to
fix UVM first.  :)

-s

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message