On 5 August 2017 at 04:28, Rendov Norra <tsobf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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?
No, I have removed the remaining sbrk() uses.