[RFA]: Fix gdb.base/callfwmall.exp for platforms without malloc

[Keith Seitz]

On Mon, 21 May 2001, Michael Snyder wrote:

> No -- but perhaps we could approve a patch that would cause this
> test to be skipped (or xfailed) for targets in which we know it
> cannot pass.

Somewhere I am sitting on patches to change the behavior of this to XFAIL
if malloc does not exist. It does not rely on a particular config
variable. Instead, it queries gdb if malloc exists in the symbol table.

Would this be better? (Didn't we have this discussion a little while ago?
Deja vu?)

Keith