From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Peter Graf <p.graf@itknet.de>
To: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
Cc: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [ECOS] sscanf() vs. fgetc()
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 02:33:00 -0000
Message-id: <3.0.5.32.20010713113305.0092fae0@128.128.128.220>
References: <3.0.5.32.20010712104805.00914420@128.128.128.220> <3.0.5.32.20010712145511.0093c540@128.128.128.220> <3.0.5.32.20010712164238.0093f5e0@128.128.128.220> <86wv5e108s.fsf@halftrack.hq.acn-group.ch> <3B4DF279.C2CE3353@redhat.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg00402.html

Hi Jonathan,

>Hah. I'd just debugged this myself this far.

Oh you could reproduce it? At first, it seemed to work on your target.

>You are entirely correct. It shouldn't wait at all for a device that's
>currently reading - nothing needs
>to be flushed. So.....
>
>[snip]

That I call quick response :-))) !

I've applied your patch and now everything seems to works fine!
A good improvement for the eCos C Library!

Thank you and Robin very much for all your help.

Peter