From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Jun 19 20:24:00 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA06868
          for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 19 Jun 1997 20:24:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from awfulhak.demon.co.uk (awfulhak.demon.co.uk [158.152.17.1])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA06850
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 19 Jun 1997 20:23:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from awfulhak.demon.co.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by awfulhak.demon.co.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA29697;
	Fri, 20 Jun 1997 03:17:12 +0100 (BST)
Message-Id: <199706200217.DAA29697@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96
To: David Dawes <dawes@rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au>
cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: xperfmon++ problem (again) 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 20 Jun 1997 11:18:39 +1000."
             <19970620111839.40700@rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 03:17:12 +0100
From: Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.org>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

[.....]
> >FWIW, this is the patch - it solves my knews problem, but isn't
> >*really* the right answer :|  Copy it to
> >/usr/ports/x11/XFree86/patches/patch-af, and just "make".
> 
> The right answer in my opinion is to change the definition of
> Malloc0ReturnsNULL back to YES in FreeBSD.cf.  That won't cause
> any problems for the case where malloc(0) returns a non-NULL pointer.

Are you sure that when Malloc0ReturnsNULL is set to YES, pointer
values returned from malloc(0) are freed ?  Maybe there's some nasty
code that says something like

#if !Malloc0ReturnsNUL        /* or whatever */
if (!mallocSize)
  free(ptr);
#endif

although I'd hope not !

> David