Re: Net version 1.1.0: gcc 2.95.2-2 compiler bug

[David Starks-Browning <starksb at ebi dot ac dot uk>]

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