Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > If it turns out just to be a bug in the implementation of MALLOC_PERTURB_, > then it's not worth the effort to make gnulib work around it. > > However, if it's a real error in glibc's snprintf (as I suspect) -- > i.e., the MALLOC_PERTURB_=N (N!=0) setting merely ensures a consistently > reproducible failure, whereas the bug can be triggered with > MALLOC_PERTURB_=0, but under some other circumstances -- > *then* it requires a work-around.
It appears to be a bug in MALLOC_PERTURB_ support, after all. Ulrich replied to <http://bugzilla.redhat.com/470831>, pointing to this change to glibc's malloc/malloc.c: (_int_malloc): sYSMALLOc might fail, in this case don't call alloc_perturb. http://sources.redhat.com/git/gitweb.cgi?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=c60d15e79c
