Paul Eggert wrote: > Agreed, though, that realloc-gnu should be made obsolescent or removed > or whatever.
OK, good to hear. > > Hmm. This module would semantically conflict with 'realloc-gnu', no? > > Because 'realloc-gnu' mandates that realloc(p,0) behaves in one way, > > and 'realloc-0safe' mandates that it behaves in another way. > > > > I think we need to remove the 'realloc-gnu' module first. This will > > require changes to the packages: inetutils, liblouis. [1] > > Neither of those packages use the new module, so any conflicts would be > harmless unless we change other Gnulib modules to depend on the new module. If we let realloc-gnu and realloc-0safe exist both in Gnulib, we need to add a conflict-detection mechanism in gnulib-tool. Which is more effort than just notifying the 2 packages and removing 'realloc-gnu'. And really, with my past experiences with conflicts between packages on various OSes (Debian / apt etc.) I wish that we can avoid getting into these hassles with gnulib-tool. Bruno
