On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 11:57:05PM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote: > Rich Felker wrote: > > considering printf broken, and replacing printf > > because of this, is a big issue. Replacing printf is non-trivial > > There is also another test that causes musl's printf to be overridden: > > checking whether printf supports the 'ls' directive... no
Yep, I caught this one a while back. It's fixed in git. %ls was over-reading (not over-printing, just over-reading) by one wchar_t when precision was specified, and if that extra wchar_t happened to be invalid, it would bail with EILSEQ. Rich
