From owner-freebsd-current Thu Sep 21 09:57:14 1995 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id JAA20411 for current-outgoing; Thu, 21 Sep 1995 09:57:14 -0700 Received: from rocky.sri.MT.net (sri.MT.net [204.94.231.129]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id JAA20398 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 1995 09:57:10 -0700 Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.sri.MT.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA02299; Thu, 21 Sep 1995 10:59:18 -0600 Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 10:59:18 -0600 From: Nate Williams Message-Id: <199509211659.KAA02299@rocky.sri.MT.net> To: Ollivier Robert Cc: nate@rocky.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams), freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: XFree86 and the new malloc In-Reply-To: <199509210650.IAA23127@keltia.Freenix.FR> References: <199509210623.AAA01482@rocky.sri.MT.net> <199509210650.IAA23127@keltia.Freenix.FR> Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Ollivier Robert writes: > It seems that Nate Williams said: > > Except when the 'standard' library has so many problems that the program > > is much more useful with these non-standard libraries. :( > > What problems did you find with the new malloc (apart from extra messages > about memory-handling error in the program) ? I've not tried the new malloc > yet and that's why I ask the question. I was talking about the reasons people used the GNU malloc library with some of their programs rather than using the stock BSD malloc. Basically, the stock BSD malloc caused a number of programs to be less useful than they were if compiled against GNU malloc. I was following up to Bruce's assertion that programs should always use the standard libraries instead of special purpose (non-standard) libraries. Nate