Your message dated Sat, 29 Dec 2007 11:41:51 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in 2.65
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Package: manpages-dev
Version: 2.43-0
Severity: normal
The lgamma(3) man page deals with lgamma and lgamma_r and says:
CONFORMING TO
C99, SVr4, 4.3BSD
There are two problems:
1. Concerning lgamma, the man page mentions signgam, but this
variable doesn't exist in C99. The man page should say that this
variable is a POSIX extension[*].
[*] http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/lgamma.html
2. The ISO C99 standard doesn't define lgamma_r. POSIX doesn't either.
So, the man page should say that this function is a glibc extension.
I don't know what SVr4 and 4.3BSD define.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 4.0
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686-bigmem
Locale: LANG=POSIX, LC_CTYPE=en_US.ISO8859-1 (charmap=ISO-8859-1)
Versions of packages manpages-dev depends on:
ii manpages 2.43-0 Manual pages about using a GNU/Lin
manpages-dev recommends no packages.
-- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Source: manpages
Source-Version: 2.65-1
--
Thomas Huriaux
--- End Message ---
