On 06/20/2012 05:04 AM, Rich Felker wrote:
Some more updates..
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:49:44AM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
When I compile all of gnulib, I also get a compilation error
(may be a musl or a gnulib problem, haven't investigated):
fsusage.c: In function 'get_fs_usage':
On 06/20/2012 07:21 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
Replacement of mktime, because of
checking for working mktime... no
This test is buggy; it goes into an infinite loop due to integer
overflow UB, because the condition to break out of the loop is only
checked when the test does not fail:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:10:11PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
Unfortunately, you are out of date. POSIX _does_ require
duplocale(LC_GLOBAL_LOCALE) to work:
http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=301
OK. I'll add support. For now all it requires is avoiding
dereferencing the pointer, anyway.
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:49:44AM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
[CCing the musl list]
Isaac Dunham wrote in
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2012-06/msg00101.html:
musl is designed for standards conformance,
There is a recipe, in http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Testing/Gnulib,
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 03:28:02PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
Replacement of getcwd, because of
checking whether getcwd handles long file names properly... no, but it is
partly working
This test is failing because musl uses the kernel to resolve the
current directory name, and the kernel
Some more updates..
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:49:44AM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
Replacements of *printf, because of
[...]
checking whether printf survives out-of-memory conditions... no
This was caused by the pointer-arithmetic overflow bug I just fixed in
git. It should no longer fail,
On 06/19/2012 09:04 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
Replacement of duplocale, because of
checking whether duplocale(LC_GLOBAL_LOCALE) works... no
POSIX does not specify any use of LC_GLOBAL_LOCALE except as an
argument to uselocale. Is there a reason it's needed? Perhaps more
importantly, is the
Some updates...
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:49:44AM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
There is a recipe, in http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Testing/Gnulib,
that explains how to use gnulib to check a libc against bugs. When I apply
this to musl-0.9.1, I get this list of problems:
Replacements of
On 06/18/2012 06:11 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
Some updates...
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:49:44AM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
There is a recipe, in http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Testing/Gnulib,
that explains how to use gnulib to check a libc against bugs. When I apply
this to musl-0.9.1, I
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 08:07:40PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
On 06/18/2012 06:11 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
Some updates...
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:49:44AM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
There is a recipe, in http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Testing/Gnulib,
that explains how to use gnulib to
[CCing the musl list]
Isaac Dunham wrote in
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2012-06/msg00101.html:
musl is designed for standards conformance,
There is a recipe, in http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Testing/Gnulib,
that explains how to use gnulib to check a libc against bugs.
Be
[CCing the musl list]
Isaac Dunham wrote in
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2012-06/msg00101.html:
musl is designed for standards conformance,
There is a recipe, in http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Testing/Gnulib,
that explains how to use gnulib to check a libc against bugs.
Be
12 matches
Mail list logo
