From owner-freebsd-current Thu Sep 21 12:23:05 1995 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id MAA25043 for current-outgoing; Thu, 21 Sep 1995 12:23:05 -0700 Received: from devnull (devnull.mpd.tandem.com [131.124.4.29]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id MAA25037 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 1995 12:23:03 -0700 Received: from olympus by devnull (8.6.8/8.6.6) id OAA26336; Thu, 21 Sep 1995 14:22:35 -0500 Received: by olympus (4.1/TSS2.1) id AA21896; Thu, 21 Sep 95 14:22:45 CDT From: faulkner@mpd.tandem.com (Boyd Faulkner) Message-Id: <9509211922.AA21896@olympus> Subject: Re: XFree86 and the new malloc To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1995 14:22:44 -0500 (CDT) Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, roberto@keltia.Freenix.FR In-Reply-To: <199509210528.PAA29710@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Sep 21, 95 03:28:36 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL17] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 905 Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > >Has anyone tried to link the X server with the new libc's malloc from > >Poul-Henning ? > > It's already linked to libc's malloc unless you have a version that is > linked to a nonstandard libmalloc. This is one of the main advantages > (?) of not putting phkmalloc in a special library that almost no one > will use. It also shows why third party programs should not use > nonstandard libraries to avoid problems in standard libaries. > > Bruce > But I am glad XFree did. Andrew's ez would not work with XFree86 3.1 which was linked with libc's malloc while it did with R5 and R6 3.1.2 linked with gnumalloc. Of course, had it worked, I wouldn't have cared. Boyd -- _______________________________________________________________________ Boyd Faulkner - faulkner@isd.tandem.com - http://cactus.org/~faulkner _______________________________________________________________________