Re: [dev] [9base] sbrk vs malloc

From: Anselm R Garbe <garbeam_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2017 09:31:09 +0200

Hi Rendov,

On 5 August 2017 at 04:28, Rendov Norra <tsobf242_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> I've compiled 9base against musl, and dd spits errors about memory at
> me if I try to invoke it. I looked at the source and determined sbrk
> wasn't doing what it was supposed to. I don't know if this is to do
> with my version of musl, or just musl in general, but I replaced sbrk
> with malloc and it seems to work fine after recompilation.
>
> Is there any reason sbrk shouldn't be changed?

No, I have removed the remaining sbrk() uses.

Thanks,
Anselm
Received on Sun Aug 06 2017 - 09:31:09 CEST