Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Eric,
>
>> Like so. Bruno, okay to apply?
>
> Thanks for the analysis. The patch is nearly perfect. Only the change of the
> 'precision' variable from 6 to 0 comes a bit too late: by this time, its
> value 6 has already been used for computing the siz
Hi Eric,
> Like so. Bruno, okay to apply?
Thanks for the analysis. The patch is nearly perfect. Only the change of the
'precision' variable from 6 to 0 comes a bit too late: by this time, its
value 6 has already been used for computing the size of a memory allocation.
(I.e. it would allocates mo
Eric Blake byu.net> writes:
> It looks like the solution is to also add
> support at line 3149 (for long double) for the %a format
Like so. Bruno, okay to apply? (gmane probably botched this patch, so you can
also see it at
http://repo.or.cz/w/gnulib/ericb.git?a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/vasnpri
Simon Josefsson josefsson.org> writes:
>
> FYI, this fails on a vanilla debian x86 testing system:
>
> gnulib-tool --with-tests --test vsprintf-posix
>
> Here is the debug backlog:
>
I'm seeing it too; it comes from an attempt to call vasnprintf("%Ld", 0.0L).
It stems from the fact that th
FYI, this fails on a vanilla debian x86 testing system:
gnulib-tool --with-tests --test vsprintf-posix
Here is the debug backlog:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/src/gnulib/testdir12690/build/gltests master$ gdb
./test-vsprintf-posix
GNU gdb 6.8-debian
Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Lic
