www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Date: | Sun, 9 Jun 2002 09:08:22 +0300 (IDT) |
From: | Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> |
X-Sender: | eliz AT is |
To: | Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> |
cc: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Subject: | Re: Patches for building with gcc 3.1 - *scanf() chunk |
In-Reply-To: | <3D02463F.B5A4C338@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> |
Message-ID: | <Pine.SUN.3.91.1020609090748.12685U-100000@is> |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
On Sat, 8 Jun 2002, Richard Dawe wrote: > File Failures > ---- --- > std-v202.results from djtst203.zip 395 > std-libc.results from djtst203.zip 478 > mtests.results from a), b) or c) 525 > > I don't think the *scanf() patch has caused an increase in the number of > failures, since the result is the same with and without the patch. So, if > there are no objections, I will commit the patch after waiting the usual week. Yes, I think you can commit the patch, given these results.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |