Return to BSD News archive
Received: by minnie.vk1xwt.ampr.org with NNTP id AA5806 ; Fri, 01 Jan 93 01:56:27 EST Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!uunet!gatech!concert!uvaarpa!cv3.cv.nrao.edu!laphroaig!cflatter From: cflatter@nrao.edu (Chris Flatters) Subject: Re: [386bsd] GNU malloc in favor of BSD ma Message-ID: <1993Jan1.031438.14762@nrao.edu> Sender: news@nrao.edu Reply-To: cflatter@nrao.edu Organization: NRAO References: <1993Jan1.001332.15123@serval.net.wsu.edu> Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 03:14:38 GMT Lines: 21 In article 15123@serval.net.wsu.edu, hlu@eecs.wsu.edu (H.J. Lu) writes: >In article <1hvu79INNjqq@ftp.UU.NET>, sef@Kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes: >|> In article <JKH.92Dec31154004@whisker.lotus.ie> jkh@whisker.lotus.ie (Jordan K. Hubbard) writes: >|> >I say we petition Bill to use GNU malloc in preference. >|> >|> GNU malloc is copylefted. Using it in a library means that every program >|> compiled using that library is copylefted. That is almost certainly the >|> reason why it is not used, and I cannot fault anyone for that. > >Is that under GLGPL? Another `feature' in GNU malloc is malloc (0) returns >NULL. The version of malloc in GNU libc is under the library license. malloc(0) returning a NULL pointer conforms to the ANSI C standard (malloc(0) may either return NULL or an unique, implementation-defined pointer. Chris Flatters cflatter@nrao.edu