Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID: <3BDA8B05.142DDD80@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 11:23:01 +0100
From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Some build fixes for the test suite
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1011021133036 DOT 22550C-100000 AT is>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 21 Oct 2001, Richard Dawe wrote:
[snip]
> >       if (f->_cnt > last_count)
> >       {
> > !       printf("Count: %5d  Fill: %5d  Bufsiz: %5d  SoFar: %5d\n",
> >              f->_cnt, f->_fillsize, f->_bufsiz, so_far);
> >       }
> >       last_count = f->_cnt;
> > --- 12,18 ----
> >     {
> >       if (f->_cnt > last_count)
> >       {
> > !       printf("Count: %5d  Fill: %5ld  Bufsiz: %5ld  SoFar: %5d\n",
> >              f->_cnt, f->_fillsize, f->_bufsiz, so_far);
> 
> If we are nitpicking, lets pick all the nits ;-)  Let's cast the size_t
> members to long (actually, unsigned long sounds better).  That way, we
> don't need to do anything if some day the size_t typedef changes.

But wouldn't you want the test to break, if size_t were changed? Otherwise
you could hide the fact that the test needed some work, to cope with the
size_t change.
 
> > *** tests/libc/ansi/time/strftime.c     1997/11/02 15:23:56     1.1
> > --- tests/libc/ansi/time/strftime.c     2001/10/14 21:01:37
> > *************** compare (const char *fmt, const struct t
> > *** 28,33 ****
> > --- 28,35 ----
> >   int
> >   main (void)
> >   {
> > + #undef TZ
> > +   char TZ[] = "TZ=GMT0";
> 
> I don't understand the reason for this one.  Can you explain?
> 

This is from tests/libc/ansi/dos/io/putpath.c:

> > !   putenv(strdup("DJDIR=c:/djgpp2"));
> > !   putenv(strdup("HOME=c:\\home"));
> 
> Yuck!  Is this because of the "const char *" vs "char *" nuisance?  If
> so, won't simple cast or `unconst' do?

You get a warning if you just do a cast, because some qualifiers are
discarded (const, I guess). I've updated the tests to use unconst instead
of strdup now. I'll check the unconst fixes in.

Thanks for looking at the patch. Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe
http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/