[Reply for reference, reflecting offline discussions]
Quanah Gibson-Mount writes:
> sl_malloc.c 1.67 -> 1.68
> zn_malloc.c 1.14 -> 1.15
> Gentler message when falling back to ch_malloc
The new error message doesn't make sense, English wise. It doesn't even
- "slap_sl_malloc of %lu bytes failed, using ch_malloc\n",
+ "slap_sl_malloc of %lu bytes falling back to ch_malloc\n",
Looks fine to me, but maybe I wrote "English in Norwegian".
<<slap_sl_malloc> <of %lu bytes>> <<falling back> <to
Anyway, removing the English words fixes the problem since it's
just a trace message of little interest to users.
Which really gives the end user no idea what is wrong.
Yes, since nothing is wrong yet the message claimed it failed,
so people were asking what's wrong.
Unless ch_malloc also fails, then it might help a little to see
that it came from e.g. slap_sl_malloc of 18446744073709550382 bytes.