Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 10/25/2012 05:36 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/25/2012 11:21 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
Thanks for dealing with that.
Along with the fix, please add a syntax-check rule that does something
like this:
cd src; for i in
On 29-Oct-12, at 5:10 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
On 10/29/2012 12:39 PM, John David Anglin wrote:
hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20 has DCE threads which predates the posix
thread interface.
On such a platform, coreutils should run single-threaded
and shouldn't be mucking with DCE threads at all.
Can you inv
On 3-Nov-12, at 10:11 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
Forry about that, I won't do that again :)
No problem.
The GCC commit system generates an entry in bugzilla provided
one correctly tags the commit. Makes it easy to track fixes for a PR.
Regards,
Dave
--
John David Anglin dave.ang...@bell
On 11/04/2012 02:00 AM, John David Anglin wrote:
On 3-Nov-12, at 9:44 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
Also this related one already mentioned:
http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=commitdiff;h=6108baa4
This one seems to have lost
+#include
from the original patch to make-prime-list.c
On 3-Nov-12, at 9:44 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
Also this related one already mentioned:
http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=commitdiff;h=6108baa4
This one seems to have lost
+#include
from the original patch to make-prime-list.c. I think this is needed
to define
PRIxMAX.
R
On 10/29/2012 11:10 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 10/29/2012 10:07 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
These days, I prefer more expressive option names. As long as a short
prefix is unique, length doesn't really matter. Here, --p is enough.
However, --preserve-status seems ok, too. There is precedent for
On 11/04/2012 01:25 AM, John David Anglin wrote:
On 3-Nov-12, at 8:54 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
I've now pushed the patch set discussed in this thread,
so I'm marking this bug as done.
Hopefully, it's the one with the _LP64 check.
Yes:
http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=commitdi
On 11/04/2012 01:19 AM, John David Anglin wrote:
On 3-Nov-12, at 8:55 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 10/29/2012 12:22 PM, John David Anglin wrote:
On 28-Oct-12, at 9:57 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
Is %jx not supported, or is the * not supported with %j?
I'm guessing the latter since you got a runt
On 3-Nov-12, at 8:54 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
I've now pushed the patch set discussed in this thread,
so I'm marking this bug as done.
Hopefully, it's the one with the _LP64 check.
Regards,
Dave
--
John David Anglin dave.ang...@bell.net
On 3-Nov-12, at 8:55 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 10/29/2012 12:22 PM, John David Anglin wrote:
On 28-Oct-12, at 9:57 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
Is %jx not supported, or is the * not supported with %j?
I'm guessing the latter since you got a runtime issue
rather than a compile time one. We also
On 10/25/2012 05:36 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 10/25/2012 11:21 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
Thanks for dealing with that.
Along with the fix, please add a syntax-check rule that does something
like this:
cd src; for i in $(git grep -l -w proper_name_utf8 *.c|sed 's/\.c//'
On 10/29/2012 12:22 PM, John David Anglin wrote:
On 28-Oct-12, at 9:57 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
Is %jx not supported, or is the * not supported with %j?
I'm guessing the latter since you got a runtime issue
rather than a compile time one. We also use '*' in
other format strings, so I doubt tha
On 10/30/2012 01:59 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
Since 2.0 is the only arch that supports the 64 bit hppa code in longlong.h,
the following enables the code to compile by default.
diff --git a/src/longlong.h b/src/longlong.h
index 8d71611..8b01696 100644
--- a/src/longlong.h
+++ b/src/longlong.h
@@
package coreutils
tags 12794 notabug
stop
On 11/03/2012 07:08 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
On 11/03/2012 08:28 AM, Ganton wrote:
when I do backups, I see "errors" from dd... that really aren't.
You have a point, but I'm afraid that dd is documented to behave
that way, and it's part of the POSIX st
On 11/03/2012 08:28 AM, Ganton wrote:
> when I do backups, I see "errors" from dd... that really aren't.
You have a point, but I'm afraid that dd is documented to behave
that way, and it's part of the POSIX standard, and lots of people
depend on it. To turn off the chatter, use "dd status=noxfe
Dear sirs:
I send you a bug report.
# DESCRIPTION
Bug in dd: it sends wrong messages to stderr.
For example, when I do backups, I see "errors" from dd... that really aren't.
# WAY TO REPRODUCE THE BUG
A user can execute:
partition=$(mount | awk '$2=="on" && $3=="/" {print $1}')
sudo dd
On 11/03/2012 02:36 PM, Michael Felt wrote:
Would be much nicer if ./configure complained at the beginning about being
root, rather than at the end.
This comes from a specific test in gnulib:
http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnulib.git;a=commitdiff;h=5c53ef81
rather than a coreutils policy decis
On 11/03/2012 03:31 PM, Michael Felt wrote:
My apologies for being so late with this.
Lots of +++ at the end (might be something left over from debugging), but
ends with:
Testsuite summary for GNU coreutils 8.15
# TOTA
My apologies for being so late with this.
Lots of +++ at the end (might be something left over from debugging), but
ends with:
Testsuite summary for GNU coreutils 8.15
# TOTAL: 466
# PASS: 314
# SKIP: 117
# XFAIL: 0
#
Do not know when this came in (8.16, or 8.17) - but 8.17 also requires a
complete rerun of configure. 8.15 was so simple (or did I just not notice
it then?)
Michael
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Michael Felt wrote:
> Would be much nicer if ./configure complained at the beginning about being
>
Would be much nicer if ./configure complained at the beginning about being
root, rather than at the end.
regards,
Michael
21 matches
Mail list logo
