Re: BUG #2246: Bad malloc interactions: ecpg, openssl

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Andrew Klosterman wrote:

> > We may be spending too much time on this one point --- as long as
> > Kerberos isn't *writing* into the zero-length alloc, there is nothing
> > illegal immoral or fattening about malloc(0). Can you get ElectricFence
> > to not abort right here but continue on to the real problem?
> >
> > regards, tom lane
>
> Doing a "man efence" lets me know that setting the EF_ALLOW_MALLOC_0
> environment variable ought to let the program continue... I'll check into
> that right now!
>
>
> --Andrew J. Klosterman
> andrew5(at)ece(dot)cmu(dot)edu

Well, when ElectricFence is allowed to ignore malloc() of zero bytes, my
program runs like a champ! Might be associated with the replacement
malloc() that it installs to check for bugs, though.

(back to digging some more...)

--Andrew J. Klosterman
andrew5(at)ece(dot)cmu(dot)edu