Re: HP-UX 11.23 stdint failure (was: snapshot 3 in preparation for 1.4.13)

2009-02-24 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Hi Eric, 2009/2/24 Eric Blake : > According to Gary V. Vaughan on 2/23/2009 7:39 PM: >> ia64-hp-hpux11.23-acc622      m4 tests pass, gnulib fails to compile >> test-stdint.c >> cc -AC99  -I. -I../lib  -I. -I. -I.. -I./.. -I../lib -I./../lib   -z >> +O2 +Ofltacc +Olit=all +Oentrysched +Odataprefetc

Re: HP-UX 11.31 strtod failure (was: snapshot 3 in preparation for 1.4.13)

2009-02-24 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Hi Eric, 2009/2/24 Eric Blake : > According to Gary V. Vaughan on 2/23/2009 7:39 PM: >> ia64-hp-hpux11.31-acc622      m4 tests pass, gnulib fails: test-strtod >>   test-strtod.c:386: assertion failed >>   test-strtod.c:387: assertion failed >>   test-strtod.c:559: assertion failed >>   test-strtod

Re: Solaris 8 mbrtowc failure (was: snapshot 3 in preparation for 1.4.13)

2009-02-24 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Hi Bruno, 2009/2/25 Bruno Haible : >> > sparc-sun-solaris2.8-suncc58  m4 tests pass, gnulib fails: test-mbrtowc4.sh >> >   test-mbrtowc.c:305: assertion failedAbort - core dumped >> >   FAIL: test-mbrtowc4.sh configured as follows: /opt/fsw/bin/bash ./configure CC=cc CFLAGS="-mr -Qn -xstrconst -

Re: Solaris 8 mbrtowc failure (was: snapshot 3 in preparation for 1.4.13)

2009-02-24 Thread Bruno Haible
Gary, > > sparc-sun-solaris2.8-suncc58 m4 tests pass, gnulib fails: test-mbrtowc4.sh > > test-mbrtowc.c:305: assertion failedAbort - core dumped > > FAIL: test-mbrtowc4.sh In order to fix or work around this, I would need to know four things: - What was the configure output regarding mbrtow

HP-UX 10.20 format failure (was: snapshot 3 in preparation for 1.4.13)

2009-02-24 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Gary V. Vaughan on 2/23/2009 7:39 PM: > hppa2.0-hp-hpux10.20-hpc1037 m4 fails: 175.format > Checking ./175.format > @ ../doc/m4.texinfo:5978: Origin of test > ./175.format: stdout mismatch > *** m4-tmp.11726/m4-xoutMon Feb 23 21:3

HP-UX 11.23 stdint failure (was: snapshot 3 in preparation for 1.4.13)

2009-02-24 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Gary V. Vaughan on 2/23/2009 7:39 PM: > ia64-hp-hpux11.23-acc622 m4 tests pass, gnulib fails to compile > test-stdint.c > cc -AC99 -I. -I../lib -I. -I. -I.. -I./.. -I../lib -I./../lib -z > +O2 +Ofltacc +Olit=all +Oentrysched +Odat

HP-UX 11.31 strtod failure (was: snapshot 3 in preparation for 1.4.13)

2009-02-24 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Gary V. Vaughan on 2/23/2009 7:39 PM: > ia64-hp-hpux11.31-acc622 m4 tests pass, gnulib fails: test-strtod > test-strtod.c:386: assertion failed > test-strtod.c:387: assertion failed > test-strtod.c:559: assertion failed > test

Solaris 8 mbrtowc failure (was: snapshot 3 in preparation for 1.4.13)

2009-02-24 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Gary V. Vaughan on 2/23/2009 7:39 PM: > sparc-sun-solaris2.8-suncc58 m4 tests pass, gnulib fails: test-mbrtowc4.sh > test-mbrtowc.c:305: assertion failedAbort - core dumped > FAIL: test-mbrtowc4.sh > (m4-1.4.12 everything passes, bu

ungetc failures (was: snapshot 3 in preparation for 1.4.13)

2009-02-24 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Gary V. Vaughan on 2/23/2009 7:39 PM: Hi Gary, Thanks for your tests; I'll respond to issues individually. >> On some older platforms, the gnulib tests test-fseeko and test-ftello >> fail, due to a bug in the platforms' ungetc behavior.

Re: two test failures on mips+old-glibc: test-fseeko.sh, test-ftello.sh

2009-02-24 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Jim Meyering on 2/23/2009 12:28 AM: > I started this build+test back before releasing coreutils-7.1, > but it took so long, I chose not to wait for it. > > The two failures were for gnulib unit tests: > > test-fseeko.c:58: assertion fa

Re: %.1s format with vasnprintf reads more than one byte from argument

2009-02-24 Thread Bruno Haible
Ben Pfaff wrote: > it only did it after I had done some manual editing of Makefiles, > etc. produced by configure, and much source hacking. Somhoew this must have led to a situation where HAVE_SNPRINTF = 0. > So to make sure that it could really happen in a simple test > case, I forced !USE_SNPRI