Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/1996/06/05/11:42:36
> Cameron Davidson told me he had problems with scan formats containing
> "%*s" formats: the scan unconditionally failed after processing this
> format, after applying the patch I had sent him. That patch was the
> same one I also finally put into the bug tracker as an updated
> solution for bug # 68 (my first patch was incorrect, as Alexander
> Lukyanov has told me). That patch is functionally identical to the
> one Alexander sent to djgpp-workers sometime near the first of
> April. This new patch was now proven to be slightly incorrect as
> well. That scanf() family turns out to be a neverending story, doesn't
> it? :-(
>
> The reason for this bug is that we fixed the other bugs a bit too good,
> it seems. DJ's original version (as of V2.final) didn't exhibit this bug
> because it was hidden behind the other ones: for ptr==0, the return
> value of _innum was ignored completely, but now it is respected
> properly. But for ptr==0, both _instr and _innum always returned
> 'failure', even if the matching process worked flawlessly. I changed
> that (see patch for details, it is relative to my patched version
> from bug 68).
>
> Surprisingly enough, this bug would have never gone by unnoticed the
> last time Alex and I looked at doscan.c, if only I had ever used this
> changed version in a complete library rebuild (including the utilities),
> because this bug breaks mkdoc completely (generated libc2.tex lacks all
> the references)! Maybe I should re-check my checking methods :-)
That was my fault... I forgot to tell you that I have found and fixed
this bug long time ago and posted the modified source to djgpp-workers.
You can download modified by me libc files from
http://video.yars.free.net/~lav/djgpp/modified.zip
BTW, why don't you subscribe djgpp-workers ?
- Raw text -