Re: getprocname Tru64

Jay K wrote: > I see I lost the race here, but here is my rendition of getprogname for > Tru64, much more efficient. > > > diff -c getprogname.c.orig getprogname.c > *** getprogname.c.orig Tue Jun 29 03:46:44 2021 > --- getprogname.c Tue Jun 29 03:48:55 2021 > *** > *** 283,288

Re: Makefile operator -ot generate-parse-datetime tru64

Hi, > I'm building GNU tar on Tru64. > > uname -srm > OSF1 V5.1 alpha Note that we dropped support of this platform two years ago. [1] This means: while we may apply patches that look right and don't have impact on other platforms, we won't have time to discuss more complex issues. > The operat

getprocname Tru64

I see I lost the race here, but here is my rendition of getprogname for Tru64, much more efficient. > diff -c getprogname.c.orig getprogname.c *** getprogname.c.orig  Tue Jun 29 03:46:44 2021 --- getprogname.c       Tue Jun 29 03:48:55 2021 *** *** 283,288 --- 283,291      

Makefile operator -ot generate-parse-datetime tru64

I'm building GNU tar on Tru64. > uname -srm OSF1 V5.1 alpha The operator -ot causes errors. Can you state this stuff more portability? I'm doing this, which I realize is the wrong file, at least, and maybe not ideal otherwise, otherwise you would not be using -ot: > diff  Makefile.in.orig Mak

Re: [PATCH] regex: fix backreference matching

Well, then I have a few questions about matching and capturing groups. 1. "ab" -> "^(a*)*(.)" So, from your test case I can assume that: regs[0] = (0, 2] regs[1] = (0, 1] regs[2] = (1, 2] But if we add backref at the end: 2. "ab" -> "^(a*)*(.)\1" check_matching matches the whole string "ab", thi