A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
https://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1949 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                alx
Assigned To:                
====================================================================== 
Project:                    1003.1(2024)/Issue8
Issue ID:                   1949
Category:                   System Interfaces
Type:                       Enhancement Request
Severity:                   Objection
Priority:                   high
Status:                     New
Name:                       Alejandro Colomar 
Organization:               Linux man-pages project 
User Reference:              
Section:                    realloc, posix_memalign, aligned_alloc, malloc,
calloc 
Page Number:                I don't know. 
Line Number:                I don't know. 
Interp Status:              --- 
Final Accepted Text:         
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             2025-09-21 12:31 UTC
Last Modified:              2025-10-09 15:46 UTC
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    Restore the traditional realloc(3) specification
====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 (0007286) eblake (manager) - 2025-10-09 15:46
 https://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1949#c7286 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
The Austin Group discussed this on 9 Oct 2025, and is in general in favor of
tightening the requirements on allocations of size 0 for Issue 9, to eliminate
EINVAL for an unsupported size 0.  However, as Issue 9 will likely depend on
C2Y, we would prefer to delay wordsmithing and determination of which portions
of the text may still need <CX> shading until after C2Y has settled on their
parallel project of improving the specifications of allocation behavior on a
size of 0.
With glibc, malloc() and calloc() would already be in compliance, realloc()
would need to change behavior to match the suggested wording.
Most BSD implementations would already be in compliance. 

Issue History 
Date Modified    Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
2025-09-21 12:31 alx            New Issue                                    
2025-09-21 12:32 alx            Note Added: 0007273                          
2025-09-21 16:04 dalias         Note Added: 0007274                          
2025-10-09 15:22 agadmin        Description Updated                          
2025-10-09 15:22 agadmin        Interp Status             => ---             
2025-10-09 15:46 eblake         Note Added: 0007286                          
======================================================================


  • [1003.1(20... Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
    • [1003... Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
    • [1003... Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
    • [1003... Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
    • [1003... Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group
    • [1003... Austin Group Issue Tracker via austin-group-l at The Open Group

Reply via email to