From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: When should ralloc.c be used? Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 08:57:24 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83h98nidvd.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg3rvtsf.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83k2dihpm9.fsf@gnu.org> <8760p2wzgj.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <838ttyhhzu.fsf@gnu.org> <871szqwu51.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <831szqhbc2.fsf@gnu.org> <87d1itt79z.fsf_-_@users.sourceforge.net> <7baa18d4-2b09-caa8-005e-29008a383ad1@cs.ucla.edu> <83mvhwrgd5.fsf@gnu.org> <8539f38f-9a11-44c3-4de7-bb974c96206c@cs.ucla.edu> <83d1iq5ib1.fsf@gnu.org> <83r3753c8j.fsf@gnu.org> <83r374wh32.fsf@gnu.org> <83mvhruyrh.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1477659491 8765 195.159.176.226 (28 Oct 2016 12:58:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:58:11 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 28 14:58:08 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c06jN-0000hv-TA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:57:58 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49005 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c06jQ-0003k0-Hn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 08:58:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43602) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c06jK-0003jr-VR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 08:57:55 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c06jG-0006Dh-5W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 08:57:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=56241 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c06jF-0006DS-Un for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 08:57:50 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c06j6-0007MW-Qd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 14:57:40 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 15 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:zeh6Y1TGxF3tWhhBHtHDdTCLWdU= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:208940 Archived-At: > I think that is an exaggeration. They got rid of ONE set of hooks for > specific practical reasons. Maybe we can design a different set of > hooks which do the job and which are not a problem for them to > support. While that is true, I think there is very little motivation to go down that road even in Emacs's side: this glibc-malloc "issue" is just one more nail in the unexec coffin, so even if we can find a way back we'd still be stuck with the problem of doing unexec with address randomization (for example), and maintenance of unexec (which has proved less problematic than I expected, over the years, admittedly, but remains a source of worry). Stefan