Re: malloc not behaving well when brk space is limited?

[Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx>]

On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 07:54:22PM +0000, u-igbb@aetey.se wrote:
> 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.

I have in mind a solution which may work as a real fix, not just a
workaround. If it works out, it will probably make it into the 1.1.x
series first, but it should apply cleanly to 1.0.0. I'm pretty busy
with some other work right now so it'll be at least a few days before
I really get started on it I think.

Rich