Julian Seward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I just looked at rev 1.163 in your CVS repo, and it's definition > of realloc is similarly broken (assuming my analysis below is > correct). Are you aware of this?
I reported this a while ago too -- I sure hope it gets fixed -- it was causing all manner of problems here. Why does ltdl need to implement its own memory management anyway? -- Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org Previously @cs.utexas.edu GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C 64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD _______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
