i have seen true evil.
-
here's a thought: maybe *DON'T* redeclare kernel functions in your codebase? if you're having to write your own allocator, then you are hacking around a much deeper problem. but this is mozilla. anything is possible.
@libreleah I didn't look deeply into librewolf, but firefox 149.0.2 hums along nicely on -current here, why not base your work on the existing port?
-
@libreleah I didn't look deeply into librewolf, but firefox 149.0.2 hums along nicely on -current here, why not base your work on the existing port?
@vlkrs yeah, no idea why firefox builds on current. (though i didn't test-build that)
have a look here: https://codeberg.org/vimuser/librewolf-openbsd-port
i removed use of www/mozilla and put everything in one place. standalone port.
builds fine with llvm 19 on openbsd 7.8, when you use my stable-7.8 branch (uses librewolf 143)
149 (master branch on my port repo) needs some work. i'm rebuilding with
MODCLANG_VERSION = 19
hopefully that'll fix it for now. and either i, or upstream, will fix mozilla's allocator later.
-
@vlkrs yeah, no idea why firefox builds on current. (though i didn't test-build that)
have a look here: https://codeberg.org/vimuser/librewolf-openbsd-port
i removed use of www/mozilla and put everything in one place. standalone port.
builds fine with llvm 19 on openbsd 7.8, when you use my stable-7.8 branch (uses librewolf 143)
149 (master branch on my port repo) needs some work. i'm rebuilding with
MODCLANG_VERSION = 19
hopefully that'll fix it for now. and either i, or upstream, will fix mozilla's allocator later.
@libreleah Well, I guess I should have looked at your librewolf WIP before commenting
-
here's a thought: maybe *DON'T* redeclare kernel functions in your codebase? if you're having to write your own allocator, then you are hacking around a much deeper problem. but this is mozilla. anything is possible.
There are some interesting edge cases where redefining malloc etc. is useful. Imagine a safety process that has specific requirements like near-constant time, no chance of a failure to allocate, etc.
But I wouldn't say a browser falls into that category ...
-
There are some interesting edge cases where redefining malloc etc. is useful. Imagine a safety process that has specific requirements like near-constant time, no chance of a failure to allocate, etc.
But I wouldn't say a browser falls into that category ...
@TheLancashireman i mean, i wrap malloc in my programs too (mostly to check nulls and such - and i wrap free and make it set a pointer to null after freeing - and my malloc wrapper will err if being given a pointer that isn't null).
but directly redefining functions, yeah, that's evil.
-
here's a thought: maybe *DON'T* redeclare kernel functions in your codebase? if you're having to write your own allocator, then you are hacking around a much deeper problem. but this is mozilla. anything is possible.
@libreleah
Aaaaaaaaaaa -
here's a thought: maybe *DON'T* redeclare kernel functions in your codebase? if you're having to write your own allocator, then you are hacking around a much deeper problem. but this is mozilla. anything is possible.
fuck u mozilla
--- memory/build/mozjemalloc.cpp.orig
+++ memory/build/mozjemalloc.cpp
@@ -5257,7 +5257,7 @@ static void replace_malloc_init_funcs(malloc_table_t* table) {
#endif
#define NOTHROW_MALLOC_DECL(...) \
- MOZ_MEMORY_API MACRO_CALL(GENERIC_MALLOC_DECL, (noexcept(true), __VA_ARGS__))
+ MOZ_MEMORY_API MACRO_CALL(GENERIC_MALLOC_DECL, (, __VA_ARGS__))u will not defeat me mozilla
-
here's a thought: maybe *DON'T* redeclare kernel functions in your codebase? if you're having to write your own allocator, then you are hacking around a much deeper problem. but this is mozilla. anything is possible.
@libreleah malloc isn't a kernel function, it's part of libc -
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topicR relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
-
@libreleah malloc isn't a kernel function, it's part of libc
@noisytoot how asinine. yes, technically you are correct, but what, pray tell, implements said allocator that malloc returns pointers from?
-
@noisytoot how asinine. yes, technically you are correct, but what, pray tell, implements said allocator that malloc returns pointers from?
@libreleah it's using syscalls implemented by the kernel (mmap and/or brk probably), but those aren't what firefox is reimplementing
whatever firefox is doing does seem to break LD_PRELOADing another allocator, which is annoying. when I tried LD_PRELOADing mimalloc globally on alpine it broke audio/video playback
