On 31/08/16 11:13, Alastair Hughes wrote: > We weren't supplying the rpl_malloc function needed if this failed, and > didn't check for realloc, so just remove. > > Signed-off-by: Alastair Hughes <[email protected]> > --- > > The build will currently fail if cross compiling or if > ac_cv_func_malloc_0_nonnull=no is set, because we don't supply a rpl_malloc > function anywhere. As we don't use AC_FUNC_REALLOC either, just assume that we > will never encounter a buggy system and remove the check. > > The other option appears to be to provide a malloc definition somewhere, but > in > that case it appears that we should also check for realloc. > > I'm unsure which one should be used - opinions?
We are not providing a malloc definition... So this patch is fine. Allan
