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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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/