Re: Removal of unexec support from glibc malloc

[Daniel Colascione <dancol at dancol dot org>]

On 01/18/2016 11:30 AM, John Wiegley wrote:
>>>>>> Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> writes:
> 
>> Thanks for that heads-up. Making the Emacs unexec mechanism more portable
>> has been our to-do list for some time, and this will light more of a fire
>> under it. We're already under a feature freeze for Emacs 25, though, so
>> Emacs 25 will have to go out without the fix (which will be reasonably
>> substantial, alas).
> 
> Hi Paul,
> 
> Can you elaborate what unexec has been doing for us up till now, and what
> living without it will entail in terms of both technical content and work
> required?

As long as the ABI support is there, we can keep using the "separate
malloc implementation" even if glibc doesn't cooperate by providing
convenient headers to access it.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature