Hi Gary,
> % cc -I. -mr -Qn -xstrconst -xO2 -xtarget=ultra2 -xarch=v8plusa \
> -o foo1 foo1.c
> % LC_ALL=zh_CN.GB18030 ./foo1
> 0x00F0 2
>
> % cc -I. -mr -Qn -xstrconst -xO2 -xtarget=ultra2 -xarch=v8plusa \
> -o foo2 foo2.c
> % LC_ALL=zh_CN.GB18030 ./foo2
> 0x5EDC 4
>
> > The expected ou
Eric Blake wrote:
> And does it make a difference which of these four possibilities you use?
>
> 1. #include
> 2. #include
> 3. #include
>#include
> 4. #include
>#include
I reproduce the same error as Gary, on ia64-hp-hpux11.23 with aCC 6.17.
i.c preprocessed with the gnulib header
Gary V. Vaughan gnu.org> writes:
> Almost there now =)O|
>
> PASS: test-binary-io.sh
> PASS: test-errno
> PASS: test-fseek.sh
> Skipping test: ungetc cannot handle arbitrary bytes
> SKIP: test-fseek2.sh
> PASS: test-fseeko.sh
> Skipping test: ungetc cannot handle arbitrary bytes
> SKIP: test-fse
Hi Eric,
Almost there now =)O|
2009/2/26 Eric Blake :
> Hmm. I suspect that ungetc.m4 needs work. Can you confirm that
> FUNC_UNGETC_BROKEN did not get defined? On a working platform, the configure
> output includes:
>
> checking whether ungetc works on arbitrary bytes... yes
checking for fse
Gary V. Vaughan gnu.org> writes:
> > Gary V. Vaughan gnu.org> writes:
>
> #define INT8_C(__c) (__c)
> #define UINT8_C(__c) __CONCAT_U__(__c)
> #define INT8_MAX INT8_C(127)
>
> >
> >> > l7 UINT8_MAX
> >> > l8 UINT16_MAX
> >> > l9 UINT32_MAX
> >> >
Gary V. Vaughan gnu.org> writes:
Hi Gary,
> ...
> PASS: test-binary-io.sh
> PASS: test-errno
> PASS: test-fseek.sh
Thanks for the rapid feedback. Good - I made progress. I successfully split
fseek.c into two tests, successfully isolating the first test from buggy ungetc.
> ../../gltests/test
Hi Eric,
2009/2/26 Eric Blake :
> Gary V. Vaughan gnu.org> writes:
>
>> > l7 UINT8_MAX
>> > l8 UINT16_MAX
>> > l9 UINT32_MAX
>> > =
>> > $ cc -AC99 i.c
>>
>> Trimming the system files fat leaves:
>>
>> l7 255u
>> l8 65535u
>> l9 4294967295ul
>
> Yep. l
Hi Eric,
Thanks for following through with this!
2009/2/25 Eric Blake :
> Would someone with access to a system that has previously been failing the
> ftell/fseek tests (older glibc, HPUX, and perhaps other old platforms) please
> check this patch? The expected results is that test-fseek.sh now
Gary V. Vaughan gnu.org> writes:
> > l7 UINT8_MAX
> > l8 UINT16_MAX
> > l9 UINT32_MAX
> > =
> > $ cc -AC99 i.c
>
> Trimming the system files fat leaves:
>
> l7 255u
> l8 65535u
> l9 4294967295ul
Yep. l7 and l8 demonstrate bugs in the system header's
Eric Blake byu.net> writes:
> git reset --hard e8e63
> ./gnulib-tool --with-tests --test vasprintf-posix
>
> fails:
>
> ../../gltests/test-vasprintf-posix.c:3624: assertion failed
> Abort trap
> FAIL: test-vasprintf-posix
>
> In the debugger, I see that vasprintf(&result,"%.*ls",2,L"ab") is s
Hi Bruno,
2009/2/25 Bruno Haible :
> Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>> All pass except this one:
>>
>> ...
>> cc -I. -I../lib -I. -I. -I.. -I./.. -I../lib -I./../lib -I../intl
>> +O2 -Ae -z +Ofltacc +ESlit +DAportable +Oentrysched +Odataprefetch
>> +Onolimit -c test-vasprintf-posix.c
>> test-vasprintf-p
Hi Bruno,
2009/2/25 Bruno Haible :
> Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>> #define INT8_MAX INT8_C(127)
>> #define INT16_MAX INT16_C(32767)
>> #define INT32_MAX INT32_C(2147483647)
>> #define INT64_MAX INT64_C(9223372036854775807)
>>
>> #define INT8_MIN (-INT8_MAX - 1)
>> #define INT16_MIN (-
Bruno Haible clisp.org> writes:
>
> There is also a more complicated case: when a %ls directive occurs
> in a char* format string, or a %s directive in a wchar_t* format string.
> In these two cases, the only robust fix that I see is to implement the
> entire handling of this directive ourselves
Would someone with access to a system that has previously been failing the
ftell/fseek tests (older glibc, HPUX, and perhaps other old platforms) please
check this patch? The expected results is that test-fseek.sh now passes, and
test-fseek2.sh skips (likewise for fseeko, ftell, ftello).
You c
Ondřej Vašík writes:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> + if (res == EAI_AGAIN)
>> +{
>> + fprintf (stderr, "skipping getaddrinfo test: no network?\n");
>> + return 77;
>> +}
>
> Actually this does break the test-suite if more than one of the subtests
> are skipped (network unavailab
Jim Meyering wrote:
> + if (res == EAI_AGAIN)
> + {
> + fprintf (stderr, "skipping getaddrinfo test: no network?\n");
> + return 77;
> + }
Actually this does break the test-suite if more than one of the subtests
are skipped (network unavailable - e.g. coreutils koji build)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Gary V. Vaughan on 2/24/2009 11:23 PM:
>
>>From inttypes.h (which is included by stdint.h):
>
> #define INT8_C(__c) (__c)
> #define UINT8_C(__c) __CONCAT_U__(__c)
That should be flagged as a bug,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Gary V. Vaughan on 2/24/2009 11:03 PM:
> I applied your patch and reran the testsuite everywhere. It does indeed
> fix the problem above and hpux11.31 now passes, however our older non-C99
> compilers choke on the declaration after statem
Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> All pass except this one:
>
> ...
> cc -I. -I../lib -I. -I. -I.. -I./.. -I../lib -I./../lib -I../intl
> +O2 -Ae -z +Ofltacc +ESlit +DAportable +Oentrysched +Odataprefetch
> +Onolimit -c test-vasprintf-posix.c
> test-vasprintf-posix.c:2804: assertion failed
> FAIL: test-v
Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> #define INT8_MAX INT8_C(127)
> #define INT16_MAX INT16_C(32767)
> #define INT32_MAX INT32_C(2147483647)
> #define INT64_MAX INT64_C(9223372036854775807)
>
> #define INT8_MIN (-INT8_MAX - 1)
> #define INT16_MIN (-INT16_MAX - 1)
> #define INT32_MIN (-INT32_M
Hi Eric,
2009/2/24 Eric Blake :
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> According to Gary V. Vaughan on 2/23/2009 7:39 PM:
>> hppa2.0-hp-hpux10.20-hpc1037 m4 fails: 175.format
>> Checking ./175.format
>> @ ../doc/m4.texinfo:5978: Origin of test
>> ./175.format: stdout mismatch
>> **
21 matches
Mail list logo
