This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Net version 1.1.0: gcc 2.95.2-2 compiler bug
- To: cygwin at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: Net version 1.1.0: gcc 2.95.2-2 compiler bug
- From: David Starks-Browning <starksb at ebi dot ac dot uk>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 13:03:42 +0100
- References: <m13BsYa-003yOHC@smtp.web.de>
Is this fix likely to get incorporated into latest soon, or should I
add something to the FAQ about it?
Thanks,
David (Cygwin FAQ maintainer)
On Tuesday 11 Jul 00, Ulrich Jakobus writes:
> Hello,
>
> concerning the following problem:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 01:42:35PM -1000, Jim Heasley wrote:
> > >In porting some astronomical data handling software from linux/unix to
> > >Cygwin (the latest nework release, 1.1.0 I believe), I discovered an
> > >error in how gcc 2.95.2-2 generates output of a floating or double
> > >variable set to 0.0 when formatted with a %E format. I didn't get any
> > >hits on this problem in the FAQ or mail lists. The following little
> > >test program illustrates the problem:
> >
> > To investigate this problem, please check out the 'newlib' part of the
> > cygwin package. That's where things like printf are implemented.
> >
> > cgf
>
> Please see the earlier discussions about that problem in
> this mailing list:
>
> - cygwin-1.1.2: printf("%e") broken
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2000-06/msg00358.html
>
> - Latest gcc/cygwin - bug in %e format specifier?
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2000-06/msg00730.html
>
> - Re: Latest gcc/cygwin - bug in %e format specifier?
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2000-06/msg00745.html
>
> The last reference has a fix in vfprintf.c:
>
> 2000-06-15 DJ Delorie <dj@cygnus.com>
>
> * libc/stdio/vfprintf.c: pad 0.0 correctly with %e
>
>
> Ulrich
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com