GNU bug report logs - #13525
8.20 - [seq 1 3 1] treated as [seq 1 3]

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Pádraig Brady <P <at> draigBrady.com>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#13525: closed (8.20 - [seq 1 3 1] treated as [seq 1 3])
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:25:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:23:22 +0000
with message-id <50FE76AA.707 <at> draigBrady.com>
and subject line Re: bug#13525: 8.20 - [seq 1 3 1] treated as [seq 1 3]
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #13525,
regarding 8.20 - [seq 1 3 1] treated as [seq 1 3]
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
13525: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13525
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: "Marcel Böhme" <hawkie <at> web.de>
To: bug-coreutils <at> gnu.org
Subject: 8.20 - [seq 1 3 1] treated as [seq 1 3]
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:43:14 +0100 (CET)

Dear all,

There is another bug that sneaked into the speed patch of seq on 13.09.12:

560   if (all_digits_p (argv[optind])
561       && (n_args == 1 || all_digits_p (argv[optind + 1]))
562       && (n_args < 3 || STREQ ("1", argv[optind + 2]))
563       && !equal_width && !format_str && strlen (separator) == 1)

That should probably be:
560   if (all_digits_p (argv[optind])
561       && (n_args == 1 || all_digits_p (argv[optind + 1]))
562       && (n_args < 3 || STREQ ("1", argv[optind + 1]))
563       && !equal_width && !format_str && strlen (separator) == 1)

Best regards,
 Marcel

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Pádraig Brady <P <at> draigBrady.com>
To: Marcel Böhme <hawkie <at> web.de>
Cc: 13525-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#13525: 8.20 - [seq 1 3 1] treated as [seq 1 3]
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:23:22 +0000

[Message part 4 (text/plain, inline)]

On 01/22/2013 10:43 AM, Marcel Böhme wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> There is another bug that sneaked into the speed patch of seq on 13.09.12:
>
> 560   if (all_digits_p (argv[optind])
> 561       && (n_args == 1 || all_digits_p (argv[optind + 1]))
> 562       && (n_args < 3 || STREQ ("1", argv[optind + 2]))
> 563       && !equal_width && !format_str && strlen (separator) == 1)
>
> That should probably be:
> 560   if (all_digits_p (argv[optind])
> 561       && (n_args == 1 || all_digits_p (argv[optind + 1]))
> 562       && (n_args < 3 || STREQ ("1", argv[optind + 1]))
> 563       && !equal_width && !format_str && strlen (separator) == 1)

Sigh we really messed up seq in that release :(
The attached should fix it:

I also notice another regression,
which I'll fix in a moment.

 $ seq 0 1 0
 0
 1

thanks,
Pádraig.

[seq-ignored-step.diff (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.