This thread blows my mind. I don't know how somebody could accumulate enough skill and experience to develop stuff like this and come to the conclusion that modifying the standard behavior of malloc is a good idea. Mind blowing.
on a harddrive this behaviour is standard, there come message disk full, and a user can free some memory and try again.Is this not usefull ?.Or is it better to change as in memalloc case, to crash the system, if not enough hardisk space is here, or end the program, or force a developer to check if there is always enough diskspace free ?
i have now download apache and search for malloc
the first entry i find was in support.ab.c
""""
ssl_info = malloc(128);
apr_snprintf(ssl_info, 128, "%s,%s,%d,%d",
SSL_CIPHER_get_version(ci),
SSL_CIPHER_get_name(ci),
pk_bits, sk_bits);
""""
here you see no check for enough mem, result is crash, with overwrite of execbase.i can make ixemul more stable when i do a check in snprintf that it do nothing when 0 pointer, so all programs work better, annother reason again 2 Versions.
""""
if ((cleanenv = (char **) calloc(AP_ENVBUF, sizeof(char *))) == NULL) {
log_err("failed to malloc memory for environment\n");
exit(120);
}
""""
here if the memalloc fail the program is end (exit(120)) do that and a user cant free some memory so the program contiue to work
there are other places that do mem alloc check in apache, but i think all result in that case that apache end.but the requester in ixemul allow a user to free some mem and he can then click on try again and apache do not end and continue to work.
A black and white list is too much work for this feature, but there are only contra about that feature here read only pro from me, i deactivate it as default, and if a user want be more sure that his system not crash, he can activate that.
Jumping back to version 49.30 sounds better. The main problem here is IMHO that there's no cooperation between OS4/MOS/OS3 developers and they don't work together to bring new ixemul versions...
[/ QUOTE]
this too not work.OS4 have their lib number as V51.1 but this support not OS4 functions.
Also when you say, we should stay at a same level, then look on programs that are out.
every dev side do additional work, to support only their features.
for example read here about the itf8_decode function only in MOS 2.0
http://utilitybase.com/
for this few lines, netsurf is not easy portable and need MOS 2.0.o think with codepage.library utf comvert is too possible, maybe it need not char by char call and is faster, i dont know.
My experience is, that new MOS or OS4 functions are mostly small functions, and devs do their best to make their programs not easy portable.
.see netsurf or OWB or other opensource programs that are portet opensource.Yam /simple mail have much more complex GUI as OWB or netsurf and there is a sourcetree possible without changes.
but when look on netsurf, i see 1,3 megabyte OS4 only code and 960 kb MOS MUI only sourcecode.
I really ask how it is possible to write so much diffrent code only for diffrent GUI that is far not so large as YAM or simplemail.
Is reaction really worth to do this big extra work ?
in the linux world there is tolerance for each system.but not an amiga OS.the comercial aspect, that every commercial AOS need enough user to support further development, introduce the red versus blue war i think and some strange comments to other systems that enhance AOS features too.
Again it is not easy to change the ixemul name only and programs can work together.
if it is easy, then i think Piru have done this and post the diffs here.I have suggest him this at beginnung to do, but he write instead long in my eyes unlogical and senseless Posts with wrong Facts, i must correct, so i need write too much.
As ChaosLord as suggested, couldn't new v61 ixemul be statically linked? that way we would fix the problem temporarily until the 3 teams cooperate.
i prefer that with 68k SDL, but sdl is also a static lib, so it is easy.
but for ixemul this also is too much work in compare the advantage you get, i really dont know what problem it have.
ixemul V61 programs dont crash MOS, situation is same as a MUI4 program run not on MUI3.