On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 15:56 -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 10:45:01 +1100, Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org wrote:
Anyone have any objection to declaring xalloc/xfree dead -- at least in
the server -- and moving to plain old malloc/calloc/strdup/.../free?
The only issue
Daniel Stone wrote:
Meh.
Anyone have any objection to declaring xalloc/xfree dead -- at least in
the server -- and moving to plain old malloc/calloc/strdup/.../free?
On Windows, malloc in one shared library and free in another is invalid.
Being able to call back into the app via xalloc/xfree
This makes us more consistent with the rest of the codebase, using xalloc/xfree
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Huddleston jerem...@freedesktop.org
---
hw/xquartz/mach-startup/stub.c | 12
hw/xquartz/xpr/x-hook.c| 12 ++--
hw/xquartz/xpr/xprCursor.c | 13
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 01:57:37PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:03:59 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston jerem...@apple.com
wrote:
This makes us more consistent with the rest of the codebase, using
xalloc/xfree
xalloc/xfree instead of malloc/free?
Meh.
Anyone have any
On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 10:45:01 +1100, Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org wrote:
Anyone have any objection to declaring xalloc/xfree dead -- at least in
the server -- and moving to plain old malloc/calloc/strdup/.../free?
The only issue is back-porting patches to old X server versions; this
kind of
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 03:56:11PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 10:45:01 +1100, Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org wrote:
Anyone have any objection to declaring xalloc/xfree dead -- at least in
the server -- and moving to plain old malloc/calloc/strdup/.../free?
The only
