On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 01:05:23PM +0200, Rhialto wrote:
> On Tue 19 Jul 2005 at 11:42:41 +0200, Dieter Baron wrote:
> > In article <20050719041450.8024B2DA27@cvs.netbsd.org> Krister wrote:
> > : The sources assume <malloc.h> exists.  Create a fake one for platforms
> > : that don't have it.
> > 
> >   Shouldn't we centralize support for this rather than duplicating it
> > in N Makefiles?  Maybe a NEEDS_MALLOC_H or USE_MALLOC_H which triggers
> > the creation in mk/bsd.*.mk?
> 
> <malloc.h> is not a standard header file. Never has been. Any program
> requiring it is plain broken. Don't "fix" such a program by adding a
> header file, fix it by patching it to use <stdlib.h> instead (and feel
> free to send a cross email to the author).

Actually, on FreeBSD 5+ you get an error when trying to include it.
Heck, malloc has been living in stdlib.h since at least ANSI C.
I fully agree that it must be fixed upstream and not hacked around by
creating a fake header. Worst case is running a sed-script over the tree
for large packages like OOo.

Joerg