Re: next snapshot in preparation for m4 1.4.12

2008-09-01 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Tom G. Christensen on 8/30/2008 7:23 AM: >> At any rate, I'm also interested in seeing how c-stack behaves if you >> don't link with libsigsegv (in the earlier snapshot, your build showed >> that c-stack still attempted stack overflow det

Re: next snapshot in preparation for m4 1.4.12

2008-09-01 Thread Tom G. Christensen
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 07:59:50AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > According to Tom G. Christensen on 8/30/2008 7:23 AM: > > > configure:6499: checking for working C stack overflow detection > > configure:6591: cc -o conftest -g -I/usr/tgcware/include -L/usr/tgcware/lib > > -Wl,-rpath,/usr/tgcware/lib

Re: next snapshot in preparation for m4 1.4.12

2008-09-01 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Tom G. Christensen on 9/1/2008 12:04 PM: >> I just noticed that the c-stack.m4 file doesn't check the return >> status from sigaction. I suspect it worked for you, but just to be sure, >> could you retry this with this patch to the progra

Re: diversion failure [was: snapshot in preparation for m4 1.4.12]

2008-09-01 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Eric Blake on 8/19/2008 6:29 AM: > According to Alain Guibert on 8/19/2008 4:40 AM: >> Sure. There is a segfault on the test for large precisions, on >> "%.4000d". On libc5 this format works well until "%.1020d", but >> segfaults for "%.10

Re: next snapshot in preparation for m4 1.4.12

2008-09-01 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Alain Guibert on 8/28/2008 8:59 AM: > Hello Eric, Hi Alain, > > | 132.diversions fails I think I finally nailed this, but am waiting for Bruno's response. > > | test-stdint.c:252: two `l's in integer constant Was this just a warning