musl - Re: BUG: realloc(p,0) should be consistent with malloc(0)

Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87y0trv5sq.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2025 21:35:01 +0200
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: Adhemerval Zanella Netto <adhemerval.zanella@...aro.org>
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com,  Alejandro Colomar <alx@...nel.org>,
  libc-alpha@...rceware.org,  Joseph Myers <josmyers@...hat.com>,
  наб
 <nabijaczleweli@...ijaczleweli.xyz>,  Paul Eggert <eggert@...ucla.edu>,
  Robert Seacord <rcseacord@...il.com>,  Elliott Hughes <enh@...gle.com>,
  Bruno Haible <bruno@...sp.org>,  bug-gnulib@....org,  JeanHeyd Meneide
 <phdofthehouse@...il.com>
Subject: Re: BUG: realloc(p,0) should be consistent with malloc(0)

* Adhemerval Zanella Netto:

> I have re-read the whole thread and it seems that most maintainers are OK
> with this change and agree that current POSIX's realloc spec has some 
> drawbacks (albeit it still allows current glic behavior).
>
> The only one involved in the previous thread that raised some objection to
> this change was Joseph [1], but I will let to say if he still think this
> potential change to glibc is ill-advised.

I objected then, and I'm objecting now as well.

My rationale has not changed:

<https://inbox.sourceware.org/libc-alpha/8734kl1pim.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com/>

I believe Siddhesh's proposed patch as the time was mostly a device to
drive the discussion to a conclusion, which it did.

Thanks,
Florian

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.