From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#12242: Emacs 24.2 RC1 build fails on OpenBSD Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 08:12:37 +0900 Organization: Faculty of Science, Chiba University Message-ID: References: <877gstuyqb.fsf@moo.wxcvbn.org> <83txvxaquu.fsf@gnu.org> <83obm4b367.fsf@gnu.org> <837gsrbpe9.fsf@gnu.org> <83y5l6amor.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1345677228 11565 80.91.229.3 (22 Aug 2012 23:13:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 23:13:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jca@wxcvbn.org, Kenichi Handa , 12242@debbugs.gnu.org, Chong Yidong To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 23 01:13:48 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T4K7P-0004pR-2y for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 01:13:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51752 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T4K7N-0007OT-Gn for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:13:45 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44470) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T4K7E-0007O8-U4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:13:43 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T4K7E-0000tC-0x for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:13:36 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:34386) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T4K7D-0000t6-Tx for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:13:35 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1T4K7e-0005bk-KC for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:14:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 23:14:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 12242 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 12242-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B12242.134567719321496 (code B ref 12242); Wed, 22 Aug 2012 23:14:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 12242) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Aug 2012 23:13:13 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43932 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1T4K6q-0005ae-EI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:13:13 -0400 Original-Received: from mathmail.math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp ([133.82.132.2]:64190) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1T4K6m-0005aS-CI for 12242@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:13:10 -0400 Original-Received: from church.math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp (church [133.82.132.36]) by mathmail.math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4A6CC055D; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 08:12:37 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <83y5l6amor.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.8 (=?UTF-8?Q?Shij=C5=8D?=) APEL/10.6 Emacs/22.3 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:63409 Archived-At: >>>>> On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:58:12 +0300, Eli Zaretskii said: >>> My reading of the code is that inhibiting relocation just means >>> that ralloc.c always asks for more memory when it cannot find a >>> large enough block in the existing heaps. >> >> For example, `virtual_break_value' is not updated in that case. It >> can lead to an inconsistent state as reported if r_alloc_sbrk is >> called with a positive argument via malloc when >> use_relocatable_buffers <= 0, and then it is called with a negative >> argument via free when use_relocatable_buffers > 0. > I see your point. Sorry, I noticed that the senario I gave above was actually bogus. Typically free will call r_alloc_sbrk(0) and check the return value with respect to the area to be reclaimed before calling r_alloc_sbrk with a negative argument. Now I don't have a concrete senario to conclude that it is wrong to change use_relocatable_buffers temporarily. I'm really sorry if my previous posts confused you. YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp