Mail Archives: djgpp/1996/02/21/22:17:34
Xref: | news2.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:1309
|
From: | Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
|
Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp
|
Subject: | Re: malloc/free ends up fragmenting dynamic memory?
|
Date: | Wed, 21 Feb 1996 08:25:18 +0200
|
Organization: | NetVision LTD.
|
Lines: | 18
|
Message-ID: | <Pine.SUN.3.91.960221082211.2301D-100000@is>
|
References: | <DMD1oJ DOT GwJ AT granite DOT mv DOT net> <4gac57$sur AT snlsu1>
|
NNTP-Posting-Host: | is.elta.co.il
|
Mime-Version: | 1.0
|
In-Reply-To: | <4gac57$sur@snlsu1>
|
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com
|
DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
|
On 19 Feb 1996, Dom De Vitto wrote:
> : The problem with GNU malloc (as with any piece of GNU software) is that
> : if you use it in a program you must abide by the GNU Library General
> : Public License, which in a nutshell says that you must make the entire
> : source of your program available together with the program itself. Many
>
> Erm, I don't think so. I thought you must provide a linkable form of the
> executable product, and not prevent your customers reverse-engineering it.
> "provide" could easily mean access via FTP.
To many commercial firms, that is also unacceptable. With the current
state of art in the automatic disassemblers, it's a simple matter of
running such a program to obtain a nearly exact source code.
You could, of course, obfuscate the source (there are programs for that,
too), but not everybody is ready to go to such troubles.
- Raw text -