From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Mar 5 15:49:52 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id PAA08151 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 15:49:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au [129.127.96.120]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA08143 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 15:49:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from msmith@localhost by genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (8.6.12/8.6.9) id KAA20299; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:25:16 +1030 From: Michael Smith Message-Id: <199603052355.KAA20299@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Subject: Re: malloc upgrade. To: luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it (Luigi Rizzo) Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1996 10:25:16 +1030 (CST) Cc: questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199603051900.UAA06765@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> from "Luigi Rizzo" at Mar 5, 96 08:00:19 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk Luigi Rizzo stands accused of saying: > > I have seen that the malloc in the Feb.96 snap is much less hungry > than the one up until 2.1R. In order to get the full advantages, > is it enough to rebuild libc.so.X.Y with the new malloc code, or > there is more ? Just grab malloc.c out of -current and drop it into the relevant place and rebuild libc. I've been using it for a while now with no adverse side effects (other than it forcing me to be tidier with my malloc usage 8) > Luigi Rizzo Dip. di Ingegneria dell'Informazione -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control (ph/fax) +61-8-267-3039 [[ ]] Collector of old Unix hardware. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[