Re: glibc's snprintf bug causes printf(1) failure with MALLOC_PERTURB_ != 0

[Jim Meyering]

Jim Meyering <address@hidden> wrote:
...
> If it turns out just to be a bug in the implementation of MALLOC_PERTURB_,
> then it's not worth the effort to make gnulib work around it.
>
> However, if it's a real error in glibc's snprintf (as I suspect) --
> i.e., the MALLOC_PERTURB_=N (N!=0) setting merely ensures a consistently
> reproducible failure, whereas the bug can be triggered with
> MALLOC_PERTURB_=0, but under some other circumstances --
> *then* it requires a work-around.

It appears to be a bug in MALLOC_PERTURB_ support, after all.
Ulrich replied to <http://bugzilla.redhat.com/470831>,
pointing to this change to glibc's malloc/malloc.c:

  (_int_malloc): sYSMALLOc might fail, in this case don't call alloc_perturb.
  http://sources.redhat.com/git/gitweb.cgi?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=c60d15e79c