Re: Possible memory corruption problem

[Piet van Oostrum <piet@cs.uu.nl>]

>>>>> "Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org> (RMS) wrote:

>RMS> Does this change do the job?  (Of course, we would put HAVE_GETRLIMIT
>RMS> under the control of configure.)

I think under normal circumstances this would generate the warnings.
However, man getrlimit in Mac OS X says:


     RLIMIT_DATA     The maximum size (in bytes) of the data segment for a
                     process; this defines how far a program may extend its
                     break with the sbrk(2) system call.

I don't know if this is to be taken literally, because as I wrote in a
previous message sbrk() isn't used at all.
Also I doubt that this will give a warning if the memory shortage is caused
by depletion of swap space rather than running out of address space.

Moreover I think this patch does not solve the problem at hand, as these
are only warnings. My assessment of the situation was that Emacs got an
unsuccessful malloc or realloc and didn't notice it. When Emacs gets NULL
on these it should abort or some such whether there has been a low memory
warning or not, and apparently it just continued.

-- 
Piet van Oostrum <piet@cs.uu.nl>
URL: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~piet [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4]
Private email: piet@vanoostrum.org