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
content-class:	urn:content-classes:message
Subject:	RE: newlib/libc/stdlib/mallocr.c
MIME-Version:	1.0
Date:	Tue, 2 Apr 2002 22:52:59 +1000
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3
Message-ID:	<FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA76008AC0A@itdomain003.itdomain.net.au>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
From:	"Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To:	"Earnie Boyd" <Cygwin-Developers AT cygwin DOT com>
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id g32Cr5Y02441

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Earnie Boyd [mailto:earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 10:44 PM
> To: Earnie Boyd
> 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?

FWIW, I've had trouble with HAVE_MMAP on in dlmalloc :[. Some systems
seem to allocate memory differently than the HAVE_MMAP code on win32
expected.

Rob

- Raw text -