Re: Bug report

[please choose a more descriptive subject line] According to Hartmut Schwab on 2/16/2010 11:03 AM: > Hello, > > thank you very much for providing puppy. I like it because my computer > is very old and puppy is fast enough on it, in contrary to the big > distributions. You have reached the GNU Co

Re: Bug report

Hello, can you please tell us where is it documented to ask APT related questions to this mailing list? It is not the first time Ubuntu questions are directed here and in case this documentation should be fixed. Thanks, Giuseppe Gil Miller writes: > E: type 'sudo' is not known on line 58 in

Re: Bug report

Gil Miller wrote: > E: type 'sudo' is not known on line 58 in sources.list /etc/apt/sources.list. > E: The list of sources could not be read.millgi...@yahoo.com > You have reached the GNU Coreutils mailing list. The GNU Coreutils are the basic file, shell and text manipulation utilities of the

RE: Bug report for "date"

Perl is my friend :))) Best, Paul -Original Message- From: Bob Proulx [mailto:b...@proulx.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 8:29 PM To: Paul Grinberg Cc: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Subject: Re: Bug report for "date" Paul Grinberg wrote: > Thank you for your reply. You ar

Re: Bug report for "date"

Paul Grinberg wrote: > Thank you for your reply. You are right, I am trying to calculate time > backwardsit only allows 6 days back...i need 7 :) the whole week :) > > Unfortunately in solaris it does not work :((( Well, this is the mailing list for the GNU system's date and so you wouldn't ex

RE: Bug report for "date"

Best, Paul -Original Message- From: Philip Rowlands [mailto:p...@doc.ic.ac.uk] Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 7:56 PM To: Paul Grinberg Cc: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Subject: RE: Bug report for "date" On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Paul Grinberg wrote: > Shell script for SolarisIt can go f

RE: Bug report for "date"

-Original Message- From: Philip Rowlands [mailto:p...@doc.ic.ac.uk] Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 7:40 PM To: Paul Grinberg Cc: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Subject: Re: Bug report for "date" On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Paul Grinberg wrote: > Gives me correct date: > > [ctpsmg11

RE: Bug report for "date"

days usage: date [-u] mmddHHMM[[cc]yy][.SS] date [-u] [+format] date -a [-]sss[.fff] Thanks, Paul -Original Message- From: Bob Proulx [mailto:b...@proulx.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 7:08 PM To: Paul Grinberg Cc: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Subject: Re: Bug report for &q

RE: Bug report for "date"

On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Paul Grinberg wrote: Shell script for SolarisIt can go future as long as I want, but past only 6 days http://www.isrcomputing.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=125:unix-shell-script-to-calculate-date-in-the-future-and-in-the-past&catid=38:technology-t

Re: Bug report for "date"

On Tue, 28 Jul 2009, Paul Grinberg wrote: Gives me correct date: [ctpsmg11-dcdhealth@/opt/app/dcdhealth] # TZ=EDT+150 date Wed Jul 22 12:27:15 EDT 2009 Gives me incorrect date: [ctpsmg11-dcdhealth@/opt/app/dcdhealth] # TZ=EDT+172 date Tue Jul 28 18:27:09 GMT 2009 Basically I cannot go back mo

Re: Bug report for "date"

Paul Grinberg wrote: > Gives me correct date: > [ctpsmg11-dcdhealth@/opt/app/dcdhealth] # TZ=EDT+150 date > Wed Jul 22 12:27:15 EDT 2009 > > Gives me incorrect date: > [ctpsmg11-dcdhealth@/opt/app/dcdhealth] # TZ=EDT+172 date > Tue Jul 28 18:27:09 GMT 2009 > > Basically I cannot go back more than

Re: Bug report of tr command.

On Monday 13 April 2009 03:45:54 maguowei2723 wrote: > I want to replace all the word of "root" to "administrator" in test.txt > file.I get a bit part of the file: > > root 1 0.0 0.1 2008 768 ?Ss 21:03 0:03 /sbin/init > root 2 0.0 0.0 0 0 ?S< 2

Re: Bug report of tr command.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to maguowei2723 on 4/13/2009 1:45 AM: > I want to replace all the word of "root" to "administrator" in test.txt > file.I get a bit part of the file: > > > yeah,but when I finish the replace by execute command tr 'root' > 'administrat

Re: bug report

On Fri, 27 Mar 2009, Mary wrote: I just downloaded the new beta afor 9.04 and had the following experience. For the benefit of the list, I've been trying to help to identify the source of Ubuntu queries by replying "helpfully" to address the question as well as asking where bug-coreutils@gnu

Re: bug report

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Gordon, John (SAIC) (c) on 11/25/2008 12:58 PM: > ran ./configure on coreutils 6.12 and got the following > > configure: WARNING: sys/wait.h: present but cannot be compiled > configure: WARNING: sys/wait.h: check for missing prerequis

Re: bug report in df

On Thursday 04 September 2008 02:13:03 Yochai Meir wrote: > Hey, > > I think I found a bug in the df command. > I was searching for information to manage my data and then I saw this > > FilesystemSize Used Avail Use% Mounted on > /dev/sda5 23G 23G 71M 100% /media/DOWNL

Re: bug report : about rm command

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 11:14:55AM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Thanks for you rapid response. > > My rm command use background: > I use it in a cpy.bat file , which is invoked by VC++ 6.0 post build > command.(per build , dll and pde file will be copy to a special directory, > but the orig

Re: bug report : about rm command

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 11:14:55AM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Thanks for you rapid response. > > My rm command use background: > I use it in a cpy.bat file , which is invoked by VC++ 6.0 post build > command.(per build , dll and pde file will be copy to a special directory, > but the orig

Re: bug report : about rm command

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [re-adding the list] According to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 5/20/2008 10:18 PM: | U:\>rm --version | rm (coreutils) 5.2.1 Thanks. This version is several years old, and typically means you downloaded rm as part of a poorly-maintained port. I would sugge

RE: bug report : about rm command

rom: Eric Blake [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 11:50 AM To: Shen, Xiaolong Cc: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Subject: Re: bug report : about rm command -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 5/20/2008 9:14 PM: | Thanks for you rapid respo

Re: bug report : about rm command

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 5/20/2008 9:53 PM: | See below: | D:\>cmd -v Thanks for telling us your Windows version and cmd.exe version, although neither of those facts are relevant to the current conversation. For the third time, I would like

Re: bug report : about rm command

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 5/20/2008 9:14 PM: | Thanks for you rapid response. | | My rm command use background: You didn't answer what version of rm, nor which platform provides it: rm --version then are you using cygwin, mingw, GnuWin32, or

RE: bug report : about rm command

e [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 10:54 AM To: Shen, Xiaolong Cc: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Subject: Re: bug report : about rm command -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 5/20/2008 8:47 PM: | bug report: | assume Z is a network drive

Re: bug report : about rm command

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 5/20/2008 8:47 PM: | bug report: | assume Z is a network driver and I has full access privilege. | Execute below command: | rm z:\aa.dll z:\_aa.dll Which version of rm are you using, and under which windows port? Als

Re: Bug report: tac crash

Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Daniel Dunbar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> The following crashes tac on my machine (6.10 and 6.11): >>> -- >>> $ echo > x; tac -r x x >>> Segmentation fault >>> -- ... > Here's what I've just pushed: > >>From d70

Re: Bug report: tac crash

Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Daniel Dunbar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The following crashes tac on my machine (6.10 and 6.11): >> -- >> $ echo > x; tac -r x x >> Segmentation fault >> -- >> >> The crash occurs in re_copy_regs and the error has to do with the code >> assuming regs->n

Re: Bug report: tac crash

Daniel Dunbar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The following crashes tac on my machine (6.10 and 6.11): > -- > $ echo > x; tac -r x x > Segmentation fault > -- > > The crash occurs in re_copy_regs and the error has to do with the code > assuming regs->num_regs is initialized when it is not, in conjunct

Re: bug report - uniq

Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> +Note: while uniq can be useful even with unsorted input, in most >> applications\n\ >> +the input is sorted in a manner consistent with field-selection options.\n\ >> +E.g., use `sort' if `uniq' uses no such o

Re: bug report - uniq

Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > +Note: while uniq can be useful even with unsorted input, in most > applications\n\ > +the input is sorted in a manner consistent with field-selection options.\n\ > +E.g., use `sort' if `uniq' uses no such option (or simply use `sort -u');\n\ > +use `sor

Re: bug report - uniq

On Dec 18, 2007 6:40 AM, Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > As an aside, I'm wondering if the --help output for uniq should be a bit > > more explicit about this property; contrast it with the output for join, > > Unlike 'join', the input to 'uniq'

Re: bug report - uniq

Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> As an aside, I'm wondering if the --help output for uniq should be a bit >> more explicit about this property; contrast it with the output for join, > > Unlike 'join', the input to 'uniq' need not be sorted, so it's

Re: bug report - uniq

Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > As an aside, I'm wondering if the --help output for uniq should be a bit > more explicit about this property; contrast it with the output for join, Unlike 'join', the input to 'uniq' need not be sorted, so it's not immediately clear how to reword its --hel

Re: bug report - uniq

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Jiusheng Chen on 12/16/2007 11:13 PM: > Hello, > > Can someone explain why the following happens? > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/DE_COUNT/loser_percentage_analysis/mysql_outputs$ uniq > test_uniq > 106996516444209225 > 1 > 106996516444209225 >

Re: bug report, sort command

Peter Alefounder wrote: > > Did setting LC_ALL=C resolve the problem? Or did it not? > > It did not; export LC_ALL=POSIX as mentioned in the FAQ did. Maybe > "export LC_ALL=POSIX" should be added to the man page? The locales C and POSIX should be identical. If they are not then that would indi

Re: bug report, sort command

Bob, > Peter Alefounder wrote: > > The sort command ignores the characters # & % = _ and, for all I know, > > other characters as well. Looks like it is acting as if I had used > > the -d option, which I had not. > > That does sound like it matches a common pattern. Please see this FAQ > entry fo

Re: bug report, sort command

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Bob Proulx on 11/2/2007 2:59 PM: >> I set LC_ALL=C as suggested in the man page. The sort command >> under my previous system, SuSE 9.1, worked as I would expect. > > Did setting LC_ALL=C resolve the problem? Or did it not? And did you

Re: bug report, sort command

Peter Alefounder wrote: > The sort command ignores the characters # & % = _ and, for all I know, > other characters as well. Looks like it is acting as if I had used > the -d option, which I had not. That does sound like it matches a common pattern. Please see this FAQ entry for more information.

Re: bug report

On 6/10/07, Luiz Gustavo Veiga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Synaptics doesn't work. Sorry to hear that you are having difficulty, but "Synaptics" is nothing to do with GNU coreutils.This mailing list is devoted to discussion of GNU coreutils (only). You might want to try searching the web fo

Re: bug report

Luiz Gustavo Veiga wrote: > Synaptics doesn't work. You sent your message to the GNU Coreutils mailing list. The GNU Coreutils are the basic file, shell and text manipulation facilities of the GNU Operating System. You can learn more about GNU Coreutils here: http://www.gnu.org/software/coreu

Re: BUG REPORT

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Please keep replies on the list, so that you will get a faster response, and so that others with a similar problem can search the list archives for your solution. According to Axel Colunga on 3/3/2007 3:56 PM: > for example if i have a file with 5 col

Re: BUG REPORT

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Axel Colunga on 3/3/2007 2:30 AM: > hi my name is Julio Axel and well i was play with cut comand and i was > trying to cut som fields from a file and i saw the comand is very nice when > you try to extract 1,3,4 field but if you try to sub

Re: bug report : tail

Mark McKenzie wrote: > Using tail from > Version: 5.97 > of GNU coreutils > tail +NUM > no longer works > tail -n +NUM > does work Your observations are accurate. If you wish to conform to the previous standard then set _POSIX2_VERSION=199209 in your environment. Try this: env _POSIX2_VERSION

Re: bug report : tail

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Mark McKenzie on 11/17/2006 9:11 AM: > Using tail from > > Arch : i386 > Version: 5.97 Try upgrading; the latest stable version of coreutils is 6.4. > > tail +NUM > > no longer works > > tail -n +NUM > > does work Read the NEWS f

Re: Bug - report

Hello, You sent mail to bug-sh-utils, which has been deprecated for some time. bug-coreutils is now the appropriate address for coreutils bug reports. On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The command, who when used with any two arguments like who am am... displays the result of who a

Re: Bug - report

Hello! On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 07:28:28PM +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The command, who > when used with any two arguments like > who am am... > displays the result of who am i. #v+ $ who --help Usage: who [OPTION]... [ FILE | ARG1 ARG2 ] [...] -monly hostname and user ass

Re: bug report

This is a bug in your GNU/Linux system, you should report it to the people who maintain it. The behaviour you see probobly happens because your shell initialision file doesn't do: eval "`dircolors /etc/DIR_COLORS`" or similar. Happy hacking. ___ Bu

Re: Bug Report Nice Documentation by David MacKenzie

Len Umina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I would suggest the following change: Thanks for pointing out the wording problem, but the proposed change is too much: it contains many details that may be true for your system but are not true in general. For example, on some systems users other than the

Re: Bug report

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Please keep replies on the list, so that you can draw on the expertise of multiple developers, and so that others may search the archives to see your solutions. According to Christos Ioannou on 3/29/2006 4:49 AM: > Hi, > > I send you the information

Re: Bug report

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Christos Ioannou on 3/26/2006 1:53 PM: > During compilation in NetBSD (Cobalt Qube 2 port) I got the following message: > > configure: WARNING: sys/mount.h: present but cannot be compiled Same as your previous report - we need more detai

Re: Bug report (as s/w requests).

Hugh Sasse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've tried to subscribe using bug-coreutils-request but I get The list software's database was corrupted for a long time, but everything seems to be working now. > no response, so I'm sending this in the hope that it will reach > a useful destination noneth

Re: Bug report (as s/w requests).

I was going to send you this information before my last response, but forgot it was half composed. Maybe configure should die in this circumstance. Still if it is only for the tests, and only one fails, probably not. On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, Jim Meyering wrote: > Hugh Sasse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote

Re: Bug report (as s/w requests).

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, Jim Meyering wrote: > Hugh Sasse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... > >> Would you please run this (from the top level): > >> > >> make && env LC_ALL=C make -C tests/dd check TESTS=skip-seek [...] > > >> If the above still fails, then please run this variant, which wi

Re: Bug report (as s/w requests).

Hugh Sasse wrote: > I've tried to subscribe using bug-coreutils-request but I get > no response, so I'm sending this in the hope that it will reach > a useful destination nonetheless. Thank you very much for making your report. The machine hosting the mailing list had hardware problems. This cas

Re: Bug report (as s/w requests).

Hugh Sasse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... >> Would you please run this (from the top level): >> >> make && env LC_ALL=C make -C tests/dd check TESTS=skip-seek >> >> If that succeeds, then we'll know that the problem is locale-related, >> making dd's use of ngettext malfunction. Did you try the a

Re: Bug report (as s/w requests).

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, Eric Blake wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > According to Hugh Sasse on 3/22/2006 2:50 AM: > > > > Anything else I can tell you? > > Try running 'make -C tests/dd TESTS=skip-seek DEBUG=yes VERBOSE=yes check' > so we can see exactly what the testsu

Re: Bug report (as s/w requests).

Hugh Sasse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... >> > *** block-sync-1.E Thu Mar 9 18:50:30 2006 >> > --- block-sync-1.3 Thu Mar 9 18:50:30 2006 >> > *** >> > *** 1,3 >> > 2+1 records in >> > 0+1 records out >> > ! 1 truncated records >> > --- 1,3 >> > 2+1 records i

Re: Bug report (as s/w requests).

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Hugh Sasse on 3/22/2006 2:50 AM: > >> That difference implies your test is running >> the wrong dd binary. That could be because >> the PATH setting (original is in Makefile.am in that directory) >> is not being honored by your make prog

Re: Bug report (as s/w requests).

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, Jim Meyering wrote: > Hugh Sasse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've tried to subscribe using bug-coreutils-request but I get > > The list software's database was corrupted for a long time, but > everything seems to be working now. > > > no response, so I'm sending this in t

RE: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

Yes, -qlanglvl=extc89 fixes it so we are good to go. Thanks. -Original Message- From: Paul Eggert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 2:49 PM To: Lemley James - jlemle Cc: bug-coreutils@gnu.org Subject: Re: FW: PMR 52061,370,000 "Lemley James - jlemle" <[EMAIL PROT

RE: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

Paul Eggert writes: > The basic idea > here is that coreutils will attempt to detect the problem, and pass > the -qlanglvl=extc89 option to IBM's compiler. (It will pass > -qlanglvl=ansi to older versions of IBM's compilers.) I assume this > will work around the problem; if not, please let me kno

Re: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

"Lemley James - jlemle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > --- begin IBM note --- > > There is nothing to fix in cc. This compiler invocation is intended to > use an older language level, which uses -qupconv. I understand why IBM cc emulates older compilers when promoting unsigned short. That is be

RE: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

> IBM's test case is fine, but it's not related to the bug. The > bug, as I understand it, is exhibited when you use bool. IBM's > test case does not involve bool. Well, no. I've discovered that bool isn't really involved; it's an unsigned problem when dealing with 64-bit math. The fact that

Re: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

"Lemley James - jlemle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > --- begin IBM note --- > Hi James, > > This is not a defect. I wrote a new testcase that exhibits the same > behaviour as the one that was submitted. IBM's test case is fine, but it's not related to the bug. The bug, as I understand it, is

RE: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

> From: Paul Eggert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 2:00 PM > Also, could you please report the xlc bug to IBM? After going back and forth with IBM some, it appears they don't think there is problem with their compiler, even though with the default options and OBJECT_M

Re: Bug Report for seq version 5.2.1

Michael Hyde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > seq 1 0 2 > > produces a never-ending sequences of 1's. Shouldn't it just exit with > an error message? In general, it's hard to predict ahead of time whether "seq" will terminate. It's not equivalent to the halting problem, but it's harder than it sou

Re: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

"Lemley James - jlemle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Oh, I get it. I didn't realize you wanted fail at compile time. Hm... > > No, that fails to compile in both 64-bit and 32-bit mode, as well as my > old development Linux box (gcc 2.96 on Redhat 7.2) It's OK to fail with gcc 2.96, since that

RE: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

Oh, I get it. I didn't realize you wanted fail at compile time. Hm... No, that fails to compile in both 64-bit and 32-bit mode, as well as my old development Linux box (gcc 2.96 on Redhat 7.2) AIX says: "eggert.c", line 3.12: 1506-221 (S) Initializer must be a valid constant expression. GCC

Re: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

"Lemley James - jlemle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > this detects it: > > #include > #include > char *c = NULL; > int main() > { return &(c + 5)[-2 + (bool) 1] == &c[4] ? 0 : 1; } Thanks. We might use that if that's the best we can do, but I want something that works at compi

RE: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

> So, the problem occurs only in a subscript context? I really would > like to catch it if possible. Near as I can tell, that's right. At least printf prints the right thing. > Does the following program catch it? I'll looking for a way to detect > that compiler bug at compile-time. Just what

Re: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

"Lemley James - jlemle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The problem isn't with bool or _Bool; the problem reproduces with char > and unsigned char as well. I kind of expected that with unsigned char. If char is unsigned on your host (is it?) I would expect it with char as well. > Moreover, the as

Re: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > That looks fine. OK, I installed it into coreutils. Also into gnulib. I'm CC:ing this message to bug-gnulib so here is the patch again, relative to gnulib. The original bug report is here:

RE: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

Paul, Jim and other interested parties: The problem isn't with bool or _Bool; the problem reproduces with char and unsigned char as well. Moreover, the assert won't catch it. Looks like a rather severe compiler bug to me. Example program output: -2 + b is -1 -2 + b is -1 -2 + b is -1 &d[-2

Re: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How about if we install the following coreutils patch? > It should catch the more-general problem, if I understand it aright. > > My understanding is that the following little C program: > >#include >#include >int main (void) { > assert (-

Re: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

How about if we install the following coreutils patch? It should catch the more-general problem, if I understand it aright. My understanding is that the following little C program: #include #include int main (void) { assert (-1 - (_Bool) 0 < 0); assert (-1 - (bool) 0 < 0);

Re: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

"Lemley James - jlemle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > When this change is made, it runs just fine (well, it works for at least > one input) after being compiled in 64-bit mode: > > 1723c1723 > < bool swap = (0 < compare (&lines[-1], &lines[-2])); > --- > > int swap = (0 < compare (&li

Re: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Lemley James - jlemle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> when compiling coreutils 5.90 on AIX 5.3 in 64 bit mode >> (OBJECT_MODE=64), >> >> sort dumps core at line 1724 or 1725 (coreutils 5.90). >> >> It works fine in 32-bit mode, and debugging statements I ad

RE: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

It dumps core as before. -Original Message- ... Would you please see if it works with this syntax? bool swap = !!(0 < compare (&lines[-1], &lines[-2])); ... ** The information contained in this communication is

Re: Bug report: sort.c or AIX compiler

"Lemley James - jlemle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > when compiling coreutils 5.90 on AIX 5.3 in 64 bit mode > (OBJECT_MODE=64), > > sort dumps core at line 1724 or 1725 (coreutils 5.90). > > It works fine in 32-bit mode, and debugging statements I add make it > seem like the code is doing the righ

Re: bug report : tail

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Peter Hewat on 8/30/2005 4:49 AM: > Hi, > I have a bug report on one of the tools from Unix utils for win32 : > >>tail -- version > > tail (textutils) 2.1 Consider upgrading. textutils is now part of coreutils, which is at stable 5.2.1