From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/4748 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: u-igbb@aetey.se Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: malloc not behaving well when brk space is limited? Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 19:54:22 +0000 Message-ID: <20140329195422.GM8221@example.net> References: <20140329170032.GJ8221@example.net> <20140329191502.072c07f9@vostro> <20140329172212.GW26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20140329180229.GL8221@example.net> <20140329185619.GX26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1396122946 1763 80.91.229.3 (29 Mar 2014 19:55:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 19:55:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com To: Rich Felker Original-X-From: musl-return-4752-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sat Mar 29 20:55:41 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WTzLw-0004wB-Ho for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 20:55:40 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 14331 invoked by uid 550); 29 Mar 2014 19:55:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 14317 invoked from network); 29 Mar 2014 19:55:38 -0000 X-T2-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50 Received-SPF: none receiver=mailfe03.swip.net; client-ip=198.27.80.81; envelope-from=u-igbb@aetey.se Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140329185619.GX26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:4748 Archived-At: On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 02:56:19PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > Yes, I understand. I didn't mean that this can't or shouldn't be > fixed, just that the changes I had hoped to make to malloc in the > 1.1.x series are not looking like the right direction for fixing this, > so we're back to the question of what to do. > > If you need a fix (or at least a workaround) right away, let me know > and I'll see if I can think of anything. Thanks Rich, I would appreciate your support for any tenable solution. The very ugly workaround which I am testing now is to temporarily resort to the implicit loader. This seems to work, with a hack of the kind I posted at first, introducing a "ONCE_LD_LIBRARY_PATH" variable and renaming it afterwards (introducing the possible slight environment corruption). This is far from a solution, just slightly better than a complete halt. Nevertheless I feel moving to musl if worth the effort. So if you can think of any half-usable solution to make malloc compatible with the standalone loader, I would happily go for it. Regards, Rune