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
Message-ID:	<3B9E4F0C.8020705@ece.gatech.edu>
Date:	Tue, 11 Sep 2001 13:51:08 -0400
From:	Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.2) Gecko/20010713
X-Accept-Language:	en-us
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Possible (new) sscanf bug
References:	<3B9E11CF DOT 3010407 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20010911111316 DOT D12667 AT redhat DOT com>

Christopher Faylor wrote:

> I've forwarded this to the newlib mailing list.
> 
> sscanf is not in cygwin's domain.  It's maintained by another group.
> 


Yeah, I know.  I just figured the cygwin list should be aware of this 
*possible* bug given the current 1.3.3 work.  You are correct -- newlib 
is the correct list.  I probably should have cross-posted to both, and 
asked that replies be directed to newlib only.  Oh well.

--Chuck








--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -