This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: cygwin 1.3.1 bug in fscanf("%lf", &a)

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 06:06:17PM -0400, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
> >This is probably related to the ongoing thread "bug report: sscanf
> >problem with cygwin 1.3.1-1".  All *scanf() functions will have a
> >similar bug.  Me, I'm still waiting on the build of my debuggable kernel
> >to finish (us poor grad students don't own fast computers....) Has
> >anybody had a chance to debug the __svfscanf_r() routine?
> I haven't debugged it.  Maybe I should submit another bug report with
> a different subject.
> How about
> Subject:  What gives with scanf in cygwin 1.31?
> That has a nice ring to it and I'm sure that the repetition will serve
> to motivate someone.

sarcasm aside, I don't think its necessary.  I rebuilt a debuggable
kernel from current CVS (of both winsup and newlib) and the scanf()
functions work.  Well, okay, I only explicitly tested vsscanf(), but
that should cover them all since __svfscanf_r() is used by all *scanf()
functions.  I didn't single-step the new version in gdb, 'cause it
worked okay (why "debug" a working routine?)

The question is: how did this problem happen?  I dunno -- chalk it up to
a thinko.  I tested my changes -- but didn't explicitly test stuff that
I *knew* was already working -- like the %f scanning in the core routine
called by all *scanf() functions.  Somehow, though, between my changes,
Jeff's changes, etc. %f parsing got broken.  But it seems fixed now.

Stuff happens.


Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]