Re: When should ralloc.c be used?

[Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

[...]

>> As I understand it, although the ralloc.c approach worked for a long 
>> time, it fell out of favor on common platforms and so hasn't been 
>> debugged as thoroughly for the past several years. Unfortunately, recent 
>> changes to glibc have caused ralloc.c to be used again on common GNU 
>> platforms and this are shaking out longstanding bugs with the ralloc.c 
>> approach. This means people using bleeding-edge glibc are suffering 
>> problems similar to what people on now-unusual platforms must have had 
>> for some time.
>
> Yes, exactly.  And since most people at least here use Emacs on
> GNU/Linux, the nasty problems due to ralloc.c are popping up much
> faster and more frequently than they did when only *BSD and Windows
> used ralloc.c.

I'm a bit surprised that such issues happen on recent glibc systems.
Emacs has been using ralloc on OpenBSD since years, and seems to be
pretty stable.  Granted, memory corruption bugs can depend on many
parameters, but still...

-- 
jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF  DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE