Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 11:29:35 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: printf POSIX compliance On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 05:06:18PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > * Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> [2012-06-08 10:55:19 -0400]: > > On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 10:44:23AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > > > Still working on finding whether this long double issue is what's > > > causign the gnulib junk to get pulled in... > > > > And it's not, at least not in the worst package, GNU m4. I #if'd out > > the broken long double test in configure, re-ran it, and even with no > > printf problems reported, freadahead is still getting pulled in... > > I'll see if I see anything else odd. > > > > i've just checked m4 and it uses freadseek and closein > > both functions are from gnulib and depend on freadahead > > so m4 will use freadahead independently of the printf issue Thanks; I think that settles it then. I wonder if they'd accept a patch upstream to fix this bug.. I've just fixed a few minor issues found by the autoconf/gnulib tests: - strtod("-0x",0) returning positive zero when it should return negative zero. - stdint.h applying wrong signedness in some of the const macros. I've also found a couple more invalid tests in gnulib/autoconf: - The getopt test for "POSIX compatible" getopt is backwards; it actually tests for POSIX-incompatible GNU semantics. - isnanl is checking behavior on invalid ld80 representations, just like the printf test. And one valid test that fails: - The strtod test is attempting to convert "nan()". This is required to be accepted and yield a NAN, even though the interpretation of the contents of the () is implementation-defined. I'll add support for this later. Rich
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.