[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:05:51 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: cluts review
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 06:55:01PM +0200, Luka Mar??eti?? wrote:
> On 07/13/2011 06:03 PM, Solar Designer wrote:
> >I got lots of errors from "numeric" - I didn't bother recording most.
> >The above are just a few of them.
>
> In my opinion, the errors are warranted.
Quite possibly they are. I did not review them at all. I am leaving
that for you and Rich.
> >The 'numeric' test collection failed 16384 test(s).
>
> Hmm, is it an up-to-date version of cluts.c? The number is overblown.
cluts as of 10 hours ago or so.
> >Test collections passed: 1/4
> >
> >This is the known issue with number of failed test collections, right?
> >Should have been 2, I guess.
>
> This is the number of passed collections. I don't know why it says "out
> of four" here, if you still have the buf.c-less version :-/
This version did have buf.c.
Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
