tags 23537 notabug
stop
On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 8:06 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 4:21 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> Has up to date centos6 the bug?
>> I didn't see it with glibc-2.12-1.166.el6_7.7.x86_64
>
> Yes. I am surprised that you don't see it and I do:
>
> $ rpm -q g
On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 4:21 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> Has up to date centos6 the bug?
> I didn't see it with glibc-2.12-1.166.el6_7.7.x86_64
Yes. I am surprised that you don't see it and I do:
$ rpm -q glibc
glibc-2.12-1.166.el6_7.7.x86_64
$ src/timeout 0.1 sleep 1.189731495357231765e+49
On 14/05/16 18:09, Jim Meyering wrote:
On systems with recent glibc, this abuse of timeout elicits the expected error:
$ src/timeout -- -1.189731495357231765e+4932 sleep 0
src/timeout: invalid time interval ‘-1.189731495357231765e+4932’
Try 'src/timeout --help' for more information.
Bu
Jim Meyering wrote:
> But that's CentOS6-era glibc, so maybe not worth it for such a corner case.
Yes, I tend to agree, this is quite low priority.
On systems with recent glibc, this abuse of timeout elicits the expected error:
$ src/timeout -- -1.189731495357231765e+4932 sleep 0
src/timeout: invalid time interval ‘-1.189731495357231765e+4932’
Try 'src/timeout --help' for more information.
But with glibc-2.12's strtod, that input maps
