Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > 1. cd testdir-fnmatch-posix > > ./configure > > grep REPLACE_FNMATCH config.status > > (Expected: REPLACE_FNMATCH is 0) > > $ grep REPLACE_FNMATCH config.status > S["REPLACE_FNMATCH"]="0" > > > make > > make check > > (Expected: No test failures) > > # TOTAL: 218 > # PASS: 178 > # SKIP: 40 > # XFAIL: 0 > # FAIL: 0 > # XPASS: 0 > # ERROR: 0 > > test-fnmatch-5.sh is SKIPped because we don't support zh_CN.GB18030. > > > cd .. > > 2. cd testdir-fnmatch-gnu > > ./configure > > grep REPLACE_FNMATCH config.status > > (Expected: REPLACE_FNMATCH is 1, because of FNM_EXTMATCH) > > $ grep REPLACE_FNMATCH config.status > S["REPLACE_FNMATCH"]="1" > > > make > > make check > > (Expected: No test failures) > > # TOTAL: 218 > # PASS: 178 > # SKIP: 40 > # XFAIL: 0 > # FAIL: 0 > # XPASS: 0 > # ERROR: 0 > > Same SKIP of test-fnmatch-5.sh. > > Does that look ok?
Yes, that's all OK and as expected. I'll commit the fnmatch.m4 patch today. When the user asks for an fnmatch() with FNM_EXTMATCH support, they will get the Gnulib fnmatch(), as it supports these GNU extensions. I'll think about how to make [=X=] and [.X.] work in this case too... Thank you for your constructive cooperation! Bruno -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
