Andreas Mohr a.mohr@mailto.de writes:
I mean, come on: why did they bother to implement malloc() at all if the resulting architecture is THAT broken ?
It's not broken, it just doesn't play well with programs like Wine that muck around with the process address space. But it's a perfectly reasonable (if not optimal) implementation for "normal" Unix apps.
On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 02:00:36PM -0700, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Andreas Mohr a.mohr@mailto.de writes:
I mean, come on: why did they bother to implement malloc() at all if the resulting architecture is THAT broken ?
It's not broken, it just doesn't play well with programs like Wine that muck around with the process address space. But it's a perfectly reasonable (if not optimal) implementation for "normal" Unix apps.
Hmm, ok.
But even if we cease and desist, then we still have the problem of that hazardous malloc() in VIRTUAL_CreateView(), which makes loading of such big .exes fail. (and on *many* other places also)
How to fix it ?
-
Alexandre Julliard -
Andreas Mohr