On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 10:27 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > reading the talloc guide (referred to by the url you gave) i don't > understand how you can just just "drop in" talloc as a malloc replacement -- > it doesn't seem like the API matches up anywhere. it's also not > clear what the advantage would be, since the code (like existing apache code) > wouldn't be taking advantage of the hierarchical nature of talloc(). > > what am i missing?
I was reading lightly over it and found that I'm missing that too. Talking to tridge, he shrugged and told me to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH so it did sound like a drop-in. Maybe he's talking about a wrapper around talloc that I haven't seen yet, 'cause I'm looking ath the sources and malloc ain't defined. As I said, I haven't had time to look into this in detail :-) > (btw, re: named -- i'm a big fan of dnsmasq. bind hasn't done us any > favors in years. kind of like sendmail -- "just say no". :-) Agreed. I wasn't aware of dnsmasq until recently, my bind-refuge for many years has been djbdns, which seems to have a more reasonable license as of late. cheers, m -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff _______________________________________________ Server-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
