... Thanks for the report. wcwidth is supposed to be declared in wchar.h, but the above suggests something is not working. Does your lib/wchar.h file look ok? Here's the relevant part of mine from a
Here's another snapshot. Final, I hope. Unless something else comes up, I will release coreutils-8.3 in around 10 hours. In the last two days, there have been two bug fixes. The one in pr is minor, b
Passed Skipped Failed \-- Fedora core 5 x86 | 368 48 0 Fedora 11 x86 | 367 49 0 Solaris 10 x86 | 346 69 1 FreeBSD 5 x86 | 343 73 0 The Solaris 10 failure is nothing to worry about and was just due to
I'm planning to release coreutils-8.4 tomorrow. It will be a build-fix-only release, along with a minor bug fix for the relatively new command, nproc. I've opted to take all of the many changes from
3 failures on Solaris 8, but probably not worth worrying about since that platform is so old: FAIL: tail-2/inotify-hash-abuse2 (exit: 1) == ... + touch f + debug=--disable-inotify -s .001 + debug= +
... Thanks for checking/reporting that. That should be fixed by Pádraig's patch. I've seen this several times already. It'd be good to fix it eventually, if only to avoid spending any more time with
I think we're ready for coreutils-8.5. In preparation, here's a snapshot. Please beat it up. coreutils snapshot: (.gz files are here, too) http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-ss.tar.xz 4.4 MB http://mey
A few warning during tests (x86, gcc-4.4.3) in gnulib-tests, but less than 8.4 with same compiler. Every test PASS or SKIP There is a few SKIP that I am not sure of the real cause ./misc/pwd-unreadab
Thanks for the quick and detailed feedback. This test works only when the system getcwd works in spite of an unreadable parent. Yours is replaced, so the test must be skipped. That test runs df and s
I got this on RHEL 5 x86-64 compiled with my own GCC 4.5.1. Haven't had time to look into it. Those escape sequences are annoying.... FAIL: misc/ls-misc (exit: 1) == ls (GNU coreutils) 8.5.188-9af44
Hi Paul, Thanks for the report. What version of RHEL 5.N? I.e., what's "N"? I couldn't reproduce that on a 5.5 x86-based system using /usr/bin/gcc. Can you reproduce it with the standard compiler? Wh
Here are the symptoms: "argv-iter.h", line 24: warning: useless declaration The following obvious patch fixes things. The current code violates C99, so Sun cc is within its rights to reject it. -- ar
/etc/issue says "Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.5 (Tikanga)". uname -a says "Linux lnxsrv01.seas.ucla.edu 2.6.18-194.17.1.el5 #1 SMP Mon Sep 20 07:12:06 EDT 2010 x86_64 GNU/Linux". This is
Wow. That's pretty bad. Just goes to show (yet again) that we really should be using -Werror also in gnulib-tests. But not all maintainers of gnulib's tests have the same standards/tolerance/expectat
... That's not good. It looks like a race, where the client thinks the source of the rename is still there for some short interval after the rename succeeded. What is the server running? There's defi