Re: [RFA] Assuming malloc exists in callfwmall.exp

[Kevin Buettner <kevinb@cygnus.com>]

On Feb 14,  4:28pm, Elena Zannoni wrote:

>  > OTOH, given that GDB's mechanism for performing these tests is to
>  > use malloc(), I'm not sure how these are supposed to succeed.  (As
>  > someone else pointed out, they do succeed on some platforms because
>  > malloc() sneaks into the picture through the dynamic loader.)
>  > 
>  > Does anyone know of any host/target combinations which manage to pass
>  > these tests without using malloc()?
> 
> HPUX should pass. That's why those tests were added in the first
> place, I think.

Do you have any idea how this functionality is implemented?

There are a number of platforms which pass these tests, but only
because malloc() is sneaks in because it's required by the dynamic
linker.  If HPUX passes for a similar reason, this is cheating.  OTOH,
if the HPUX port uses some other mechanism entirely, it might be a
good idea for us to adapt this mechanism so that other targets can
use it too.

Kevin