Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Sat, 28 Apr 2001 00:51:55 -0400
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: cygwin 1.3.1 bug in fscanf("%lf", &a)
Message-ID:	<20010428005155.E12841@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<03781128C7B74B4DBC27C55859C9D738D4296E AT es06snlnt> <3AE9ED59 DOT 7D8C51D6 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20010428003326 DOT B12841 AT redhat DOT com> <3AEA4B1A DOT 8BFA8CFE AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To:	<3AEA4B1A.8BFA8CFE@ece.gatech.edu>; from cwilson@ece.gatech.edu on Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 12:46:18AM -0400

On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 12:46:18AM -0400, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> How about
>> 
>> Subject:  What gives with scanf in cygwin 1.31?
>> 
>> That has a nice ring to it and I'm sure that the repetition will serve
>> to motivate someone.
>
>sarcasm aside, I don't think its necessary.  I rebuilt a debuggable
>kernel from current CVS (of both winsup and newlib) and the scanf()
>functions work.  Well, okay, I only explicitly tested vsscanf(), but
>that should cover them all since __svfscanf_r() is used by all *scanf()
>functions.  I didn't single-step the new version in gdb, 'cause it
>worked okay (why "debug" a working routine?)
>
>The question is: how did this problem happen?  I dunno -- chalk it up to
>a thinko.  I tested my changes -- but didn't explicitly test stuff that
>I *knew* was already working -- like the %f scanning in the core routine
>called by all *scanf() functions.  Somehow, though, between my changes,
>Jeff's changes, etc. %f parsing got broken.  But it seems fixed now.

Didn't Jeff's newlib changes just fix this?

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -