Note that this is not my patch we're discussing, but as Alfred is currently on vacations, ...
On Sun, Aug 28, 2005 at 02:51:37PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Thomas Schwinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > +void (*__malloc_initialize_hook) (void) = (void *) init_hook; > >> > >> Do you really need the void * cast? > > > The cast avoids the following warning: > > [...] > > Ideally, fix the declaration of init_hook. That's exactly where the problem lies. Alfred seems to have created the patch using glibc's documentation as an example, only that there is an error in that documentation: <URL:http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Hooks-for-Malloc.html#index-g_t_005f_005fmalloc_005finitialize_005fhook-283> #v+ /* Prototypes for __malloc_hook, __free_hook */ #include <malloc.h> /* Prototypes for our hooks. */ static void *my_init_hook (void); [...] /* Override initializing hook from the C library. */ void (*__malloc_initialize_hook) (void) = my_init_hook; static void my_init_hook (void) { [...] #v- I'll report that in glibc's bugzilla. So, we need the following: #v+ static void init_hook (void); [...] void (*__malloc_initialize_hook) (void) = init_hook; [...] static void init_hook (void) { [...] #v- Can we be sure that we don't have to also hook realloc() and memalign()? > Failing that, at least > give a correct cast instead of kludging with void *. > > void (*__malloc_initialize_hook) (void) = (void (*)(void)) init_hook; That's also what I did before having a look at glibc's documentation. Neal, could you please fix the patch accordingly before checking it in? Or is some testing needed? (I don't know how to do that, here.) Regards, > Thomas (Recycled. ;-) _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
