Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID: <3D01DA24.F092DEBD@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 11:19:16 +0100
From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Patches for building with gcc 3.1 - *printf(), confstr() chunk
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1020530075006 DOT 11104B AT is>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 29 May 2002, Richard Dawe wrote:
> 
> > Please find below some fixes to *printf() with regards to passing
> > va_lists to _doprnt(). I don't think there's anything controversial
> > here.
> >
> > I've also included what I think we should do to confstr().
> > I don't think we need to call snprintf() just to truncate a string.
> >
> > If there are no objections, I'd like to commit these patches.
> 
> These patches are fine with me.  Thanks.

I've committed the *printf parts.

I've just discovered why we use snprintf in confstr(). You can pass NULL or a
zero-length buffer to confstr(). In these cases we don't want to touch the
buffer at all. So the patch is broken.

Which is preferable?

* Change confstr(), so it doesn't generate a warning.
* Change the Makefile, so the warning isn't fatal for confstr.c?

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]