From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Moreton Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#8435: misuse of error ("...%d...", ...) on 64-bit hosts Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 13:29:39 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4D9CC60D.2090301@cs.ucla.edu> <4D9D68D8.6060200@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1302179848 27821 80.91.229.12 (7 Apr 2011 12:37:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 12:37:28 +0000 (UTC) To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 07 14:37:25 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7oSi-0006lE-Bt for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 14:37:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34843 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q7oSh-0007mc-SQ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:37:23 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41373 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q7oSc-0007mN-CU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:37:19 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7oSb-0007ly-E3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:37:18 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:50631) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7oSb-0007lu-CR for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:37:17 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7oMY-0006On-4K; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:31:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <4D9CC60D.2090301@cs.ucla.edu> Resent-From: Andy Moreton Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 12:31:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 8435 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.130217940724536 (code B ref -1); Thu, 07 Apr 2011 12:31:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Apr 2011 12:30:07 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7oLe-0006Ng-Jm for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:30:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7oLc-0006Mx-HK for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:30:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7oLW-00055D-Ck for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:29:59 -0400 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]:51729) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7oLW-000559-9g for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:29:58 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55643 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q7oLV-0002Ne-GZ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:29:58 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7oLU-00054W-8j for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:29:57 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:45044) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7oLU-000540-1m for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:29:56 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q7oLS-0001Uh-Iz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 14:29:54 +0200 Original-Received: from 193.34.186.16 ([193.34.186.16]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 14:29:54 +0200 Original-Received: from andrewjmoreton by 193.34.186.16 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 14:29:54 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 23 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.34.186.16 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (windows-nt) Cancel-Lock: sha1:+PWLksE/cXrOmeNQPPRfG8woYZE= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:31:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:45677 Archived-At: On Thu 07 Apr 2011, Paul Eggert wrote: > Attached is the patch I'd like to install, after more testing. > > This patch affects the Windows build by removing src/doprnt.c. > > This patch assumes that vsnprintf works. This is true of the oldest, > cruftiest host I could get my hands on (a Solaris 8 box; Sun itself > stopped fixing Solaris 8 more than two years ago). However, if Emacs > is still supposed to run on even-older (roughly, pre-1999) platforms > that lack vsnprintf then I can add the gnulib vsnprintf module, which > will provide a vsnprintf replacement for these ancient hosts. I > assume that vsnprintf works on Windows, so the presence or absence of > the vsnprintf module shouldn't matter for Windows. You define a pEd macro to be inserted in the format string to print an appropriately integer sized type. Would it not be better to use a C99 print format macro name from ? It may be necesary to provide the macros where is not available, but at least the macro names are well known. AndyM