[ On Tuesday, January 28, Conrad Sabatier wrote: ]
>
> Ah, OK. So there *is* a difference. I can't imagine there being anything
> unsafe about using the 5.0 version under -stable. But it would be best to
> confirm this. Perhaps you should file a PR?
>
I will pull the -current sources tonigh
On 28-Jan-2003 John Reynolds~ wrote:
>
> [ On Tuesday, January 28, Conrad Sabatier wrote: ]
>>
>> Unless it's already been done. :-) Can you check the RCS Id in
>> /usr/src/usr.bin/printf/printf.c? Here's what I have:
>>
>> $FreeBSD: src/usr.bin/printf/printf.c,v 1.26 2002/09/04 23:29:05 dwm
[ On Tuesday, January 28, Conrad Sabatier wrote: ]
>
> Unless it's already been done. :-) Can you check the RCS Id in
> /usr/src/usr.bin/printf/printf.c? Here's what I have:
>
> $FreeBSD: src/usr.bin/printf/printf.c,v 1.26 2002/09/04 23:29:05 dwmalone Exp $
>
> Now, if we have identical vers
On 28-Jan-2003 John Reynolds~ wrote:
>
> [ On Tuesday, January 28, Conrad Sabatier wrote: ]
>
>> It may very well be that printf (or libc?) has a bug under -stable. Are you
>> using any unusual optimization settings in /etc/make.conf, by the way? When
>> did you last upgrade?
>
> nope, nothin
[ On Tuesday, January 28, Conrad Sabatier wrote: ]
>
> Works fine under -current:
>
> $ printf "foo\0bar\0" | od -c
> 000f o o \0 b a r \0
>
> This also works under -current:
>
> $ printf "foo\" | od -c
> 000f o o \0
On 28-Jan-2003 John Reynolds~ wrote:
>
> We need to echo a string *and* a NUL character (\0) into a stream so that a
> program that delimits its input by \0 characters will do the right thing.
>
> He had been doing this via printf(1) like so:
>
> % printf "some string\0" | some_process
>
> h
