I've compiled 9base against musl, and dd spits errors about memory at
me if I try to invoke it. I looked at the source and determined sbrk
wasn't doing what it was supposed to. I don't know if this is to do
with my version of musl, or just musl in general, but I replaced sbrk
with malloc and it seems to work fine after recompilation.

Is there any reason sbrk shouldn't be changed?

Reply via email to