Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2003/03/16/22:31:54
Hello.
CBFalconer wrote:
>
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >
> > > Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 12:33:12 -0500
> > > From: CBFalconer <cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com>
> > >
> > > What I don't see in the htm file I posted before is any process of
> > > setting those hooks described. Nor do I find any libc/malloc.h on
> > > my system.
> >
> > libc/malloc.h is new with the development version of the library, so
> > you can only find it in the DJGPP CVS.
>
> Then why is anyone worrying about compatibility with it?
From the "What's Changed" section for 2.04 in the Knowledge Base:
"There are new `malloc' debug facilities. While not as powerful and
versatile as existing external packages, such as YAMD, these facilities
do allow to detect a wide variety of heap corruption problems, and to
report important heap usage statistics. The new functions are
`mallinfo', `malloc_debug', `malloc_verify', and `mallocmap'; these
names are compatible with many Unix and GNU/Linux systems. In
addition, special hooks, such as `__libc_malloc_hook' and
`__libc_free_hook', are provided for building custom `malloc' debugging
packages."
> I developed nmalloc to satisfy the well published and known standard
> interface, and got people screeching about failure to mate with
> other modules. I finally found a definition of those modules, and
> am even attempting to provide something close, but now you tell me
> those are for the inner-sanctum only and are not even published.
The development tree in CVS, which is publically accessible. It's not just the
"inner-sanctum" that can access it. People suggested several times that you
should look at DJGPP CVS, because of various differences including the debug
interface, and gave help on how you could get it (CVS, snapshot of CVS). Hint:
you can get the test packages of DJGPP 2.04 made by Andrew, which are
available from here:
http://clio.rice.edu/djgpp/win2k/main_204.htm
> Why not define a proper interface first, and go from there. I
> started this with the sysquery provisions in nmalloc, in such a
> manner that ANY debugger could be built without unclean knowledge
> of the malloc system guts.
Maybe the sysquery interface will help implement some of the features required
by the debug interface?
> I feel a good healthy rant coming on.
Uh-oh. ;)
Bye, Rich =]
--
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]
- Raw text -