Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<3CA9A7A9.1A8AD3C5@yahoo.com>
Date:	Tue, 02 Apr 2002 07:44:25 -0500
From:	Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To:	Earnie Boyd <Cygwin-Developers AT cygwin DOT com>
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Earnie Boyd <Cygwin-Developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	newlib/libc/stdlib/mallocr.c

In my modifying Cygwin source for MSYS I began having issues with malloc
and the offending pieces being within this source.  I noticed that the
HAVE_MMAP macro was set to 0 by default instead of 1 by default as
Dave's documentation says that it does.  Modifying the macro value to 1
caused all of the problems I was experiencing to disappear.

Do other Cygwin developers see benefit for a patch to newlib?

Should I create a newlib patch regardless of the benefit to Cygwin?

Earnie.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

- Raw text -