Markus Duft wrote: > On 09/08/11 10:17, Jim Meyering wrote: >> Markus Duft wrote: > [snip] >>> >>> gcc is 4.2.4 and there is no chance to get a newer one to work >>> currently (i have big problems forward porting my patches). but i >>> /think/ it's the library support anyway thats broken. it seems to be >>> somewhere in the printing (fprintf, sprintf). if i run an unpatched >>> "seq 1 10", i get this: >>> >>> mduft coreutils-8.12.193-d8dc8 $ ./src/seq 1 10 >>> 0 >>> 0 >>> -2 >>> 0 >>> -0 >>> -2 >>> -26815615859885194199148049996411692254958731641184786755447122887443528060147093953603748596333806855380063716372972101707507765623893139892867298012168192 >>> 0 >>> -0 >>> -0 >>> >>> in [1], Bruno Haible suggested some test from the gnulib test-suite, >>> with which i can investigate the problem more deeply, which i'm now >>> doing (as time allows). >> >> Please pursue that first. >> If improving the printing or conversion functions in gnulib >> can solve your problem, then making changes to coreutils would >> be counterproductive. > > problem solved without requirement for a patch here: i patched gcc to > have 64bit long doubles, and now all works like a charm.
Good news. Thanks for letting us know.
