From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-75115-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 16412 invoked by alias); 23 Aug 2010 19:57:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 16402 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Aug 2010 19:57:30 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (74.125.121.35)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 19:57:25 +0000
Received: from hpaq3.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq3.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.3])	by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o7NJvMjb005453	for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:57:22 -0700
Received: from vws19 (vws19.prod.google.com [10.241.21.147])	by hpaq3.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o7NJvKp5018337	for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:57:21 -0700
Received: by vws19 with SMTP id 19so5912043vws.18        for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:57:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.121.142 with SMTP id h14mr3519151vcr.108.1282593439814; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:57:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.189.205 with HTTP; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:57:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=6F-xAp7NsZJqM=W7C_bueUvmziBhhGaVoS-jh@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20100817003114.087EA84B8F@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com>	<m3vd79hcti.fsf@hase.home>	<AANLkTimPfvoVFExCZLC4EytcjH=KarwpMost6CVn6XOx@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikhm-hsb4NPgaG5syea=fJ5o+Gfq68D22Hwe1W4@mail.gmail.com>	<20100820073430.GA28054@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net>	<20100820073703.GA19257@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net>	<Pine.LNX.4.64.1008201152480.2209@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>	<AANLkTi=L2dyE_1D_MB_9TMenifmmHZkORC+3MGFcbh98@mail.gmail.com>	<20100823185451.GA3512@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net>	<AANLkTi=6F-xAp7NsZJqM=W7C_bueUvmziBhhGaVoS-jh@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 19:57:00 -0000
Message-ID: <AANLkTimuUUe2HKQsUNjE6cKX8NvqTs2W7CzV0UZi2M_4@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] Fix new FAIL `reject p 0x1.1' [fixup]
From: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>,        Andreas Schwab <schwab@redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-System-Of-Record: true
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-08/txt/msg00397.txt.bz2

On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Doug Evans <dje@google.com> wrote:
>> While thanks for catching it I still believe now my testcase update is the
>> appropriate fix - if glibc supports then extended input syntax let the GDB
>> user benefit from it.
>
> It's ok with me.

I should add that IWBN to have an additional testcase that exercises
sscanf (...) == 0 on newer glibcs.