Jan Engelhardt wrote: > >* Firmware builds with no talloc > > That may be the use case, but it is not what was implemented.
Why don't you look into fixing that instead of renaming configure options - that's just pointless noise. > If you build 0.7.0 [336915aa0a] with --disable-talloc, `ldd > src/.libs/libosmocore.so` will show libtalloc.so.2. Do you want to investigate why? > >> +++ b/tests/msgfile/msgfile_test.c > >> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ > >> */ > >> > >> #include <osmocom/core/msgfile.h> > >> +#include <osmocom/core/talloc.h> > > > >Is this hunk needed? > > Yes, because system talloc has a > > #define talloc_free(ctx) _talloc_free(ctx, __location__) > > and otherwise, one gets "implicit definition of talloc_free" and > "undefined reference to `talloc_free'". Dude, that is a kludge at a callsite, as opposed to a proper dependency fix. Try again. //Peter
