Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!asami
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi ASAMI)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Subject: Re: FreeBSD: emacs: missing library!?
Date: 6 Jul 94 00:00:21
Organization: CS Div. - EECS, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <ASAMI.94Jul6000021@forgery.cs.berkeley.edu>
References: <2va3j1$5f0@agate.berkeley.edu> <2va64i$5d9@ohlone.kn.PacBell.COM>
<JKH.94Jul5010029@whisker.hubbard.ie>
NNTP-Posting-Host: forgery.cs.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: jkh@whisker.hubbard.ie's message of 05 Jul 1994 01:00:29 GMT
In article <JKH.94Jul5010029@whisker.hubbard.ie>
jkh@whisker.hubbard.ie (Jordan Hubbard) writes:
* Uhhhh. You guys are all WAY offbase! The `segmentation fault' is caused
* when the program attempts an illegal memory access, not because it
* tried to use memory already allocated to someone else! :-) [All processes
* have their OWN address space]. An example:
Hee hee. Well, if you run out of memory (and swap space), it IS quite
possible to get a seg fault out of a brain-damaged program, which
looks to the user like "I ran out of memory and my program seg
faulted". For instance,
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
char *cp = malloc(100000000);
*cp = 0;
}
Voila! (malloc() returns NULL when there isn't enough memory
available.)
Of course, emacs takes care of such situations very well, so it can't
be the case for this partical problem, though....
Satoshi