X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<470E2F34.2F75B0DF@dessent.net>
Date:	Thu, 11 Oct 2007 07:12:04 -0700
From:	Brian Dessent <brian AT dessent DOT net>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: A problem with tgamma function
References:	<586258 DOT 4020 DOT qm AT web25003 DOT mail DOT ukl DOT yahoo DOT com> <Pine DOT CYG DOT 4 DOT 58 DOT 0710110950230 DOT 3328 AT homepc>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Angelo Graziosi wrote:

> In any case, it seems that 'tgamma' has some problem, as this bug report
> says (your results are the same):
> 
>     http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5159

That is a bug report against glibc.  You cannot draw any inferences
between that and newlib/Cygwin because they are totally separate and
unrelated code bases.

Marco Atzeri wrote:

> Not confirmed on latest snapshot

That would be expected given Lev's indication of a fix in newlib:
<http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2007-10/msg00252.html>.

Brian

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -