> On 13 Mar 2019, at 13:58, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>
> As described in the va_copy(3) man page:
>
>Each invocation of va_copy() must be matched by a corresponding
>invocation of va_end() in the same function.
It is also in the POSIX specification [1]:
Each invocation of the va_start
Vincent Lefevre writes:
> Moreover, the va_end(3) man page says:
>
> On some systems, va_end contains a closing '}' matching a '{' in
> va_start, so that both macros must occur in the same function, and in a
> way that allows this.
Curious. Which man page, and which systems?
On suc
On 2019-03-13 13:48:17 +0100, Torbjorn Granlund wrote:
> Jakub Martisko writes:
>
> I believe there are some missing va_end() calls in some of the IO
> functions of GMP 6.1.2. See attached patch for details.
>
> Are you sure that's how stdarg works?
>
> I see no problems with GMP's current
Jakub Martisko writes:
I believe there are some missing va_end() calls in some of the IO
functions of GMP 6.1.2. See attached patch for details.
Are you sure that's how stdarg works?
I see no problems with GMP's current code. I believe your patch is
incorrect in several ways.
--
Torbjörn
On 2019-03-13 12:16:29 +0100, Jakub Martisko wrote:
> I believe there are some missing va_end() calls in some of the IO
> functions of GMP 6.1.2. See attached patch for details.
A few notes about your patch...
--- a/printf/snprntffuns.c
+++ b/printf/snprntffuns.c
@@ -85,6 +85,7 @@ gmp_snprintf_fo
Hello,
I believe there are some missing va_end() calls in some of the IO
functions of GMP 6.1.2. See attached patch for details.
Thanks,
Jakub
>From d755dd08db4962ba57608d2395d9e0885fe44c07 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: rpm-build
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 11:52:39 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Fix: call
