bug#6789: propose renaming gnulib memxfrm to amemxfrm (naming collision with coreutils)

[Jim Meyering]

Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 08/09/10 09:25, Bruno Haible wrote:
>
>> The contents of the 'allocated' buffer is scratch, therefore malloc + free
>> should be faster than realloc...
>>
>> Also, the '3 * (lena + lenb)' guess is pessimistic; it is possible that
>> it may return with ENOMEM when in fact strxfrm's real needs would not
>> lead to ENOMEM.
>
> Thanks again; I installed this:
>
> * src/sort.c (compare_random): Use free/xmalloc rather than
> xrealloc, since the old buffer contents need not be preserved.
> Also, don't fail if the guessed-sized malloc fails.  Suggested by
> Bruno Haible.

This was resolved a year ago.