From unknown Tue Jun 24 01:39:23 2025 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.509 (Entity 5.509) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: bug#7228 <7228@debbugs.gnu.org> To: bug#7228 <7228@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Status: coreutils-8.6 sort-float failure on ppc Reply-To: bug#7228 <7228@debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 08:39:23 +0000 retitle 7228 coreutils-8.6 sort-float failure on ppc reassign 7228 coreutils submitter 7228 "Gilles Espinasse" severity 7228 normal thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Oct 16 10:47:04 2010 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Oct 2010 14:47:04 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P782K-0000WU-5p for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:47:04 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P782H-0000W8-TT for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:47:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P785n-0004AG-4b for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:50:40 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.1 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]:56916) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P785n-0004AC-2e for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:50:39 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=52664 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P785m-00037D-8d for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:50:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P785l-00049t-DH for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:50:38 -0400 Received: from smtp3-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.3]:51147) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P785k-000495-Qi for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 10:50:37 -0400 Received: from pii350 (unknown [82.236.101.3]) by smtp3-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 03E05A61F5 for ; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 16:50:29 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <14de01cb6d40$fb9f80a0$f9b5a8c0@pii350> From: "Gilles Espinasse" To: Subject: coreutils-8.6 sort-float failure on ppc Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 16:46:56 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.2001 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.2001 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, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-Spam-Score: -4.1 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -4.3 (----) Just tested 8.6 on linux glibc-2.11.1/gcc-4.4.5 LFS build on x86, sparc and ppc First a good news is that on sparc (32-bits), 8.6 test suite is now passing I didn't report yet a failure on misc/stty which was Failure was + stty -icanon stty: standard input: unable to perform all requested operations The bad news is that it fail now on ppc in FAIL: misc/sort-float + LC_ALL=C + sort -sg + compare out exp + diff -u out exp --- out 2010-10-16 13:40:44.000000000 +0000 +++ exp 2010-10-16 13:40:44.000000000 +0000 @@ -2,11 +2,11 @@ -1.797693e+308 -3.402823e+38 -1.175494e-38 --2.004168e-292 -2.225074e-308 +-2.004168e-292 0 -2.225074e-308 2.004168e-292 +2.225074e-308 1.175494e-38 3.402823e+38 1.797693e+308 + fail=1 ... + LC_ALL=fr_FR + sort -sg + compare out exp + diff -u out exp --- out 2010-10-16 13:40:44.000000000 +0000 +++ exp 2010-10-16 13:40:44.000000000 +0000 @@ -2,11 +2,11 @@ -1,797693e+308 -3,402823e+38 -1,175494e-38 --2,004168e-292 -2,225074e-308 +-2,004168e-292 0 -2,225074e-308 2,004168e-292 +2,225074e-308 1,175494e-38 3,402823e+38 1,797693e+308 + fail=1 + Exit 1 Gilles From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Oct 16 15:11:13 2010 Received: (at 7228) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Oct 2010 19:11:13 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P7C9x-0004aF-76 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 15:11:13 -0400 Received: from mx.meyering.net ([82.230.74.64]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P7C9u-0004a9-S9 for 7228@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 15:11:12 -0400 Received: by rho.meyering.net (Acme Bit-Twister, from userid 1000) id 4255A563; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 21:14:48 +0200 (CEST) From: Jim Meyering To: "Gilles Espinasse" Subject: Re: bug#7228: coreutils-8.6 sort-float failure on ppc In-Reply-To: <14de01cb6d40$fb9f80a0$f9b5a8c0@pii350> (Gilles Espinasse's message of "Sat, 16 Oct 2010 16:46:56 +0200") References: <14de01cb6d40$fb9f80a0$f9b5a8c0@pii350> Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 21:14:48 +0200 Message-ID: <87r5fqdk5z.fsf@meyering.net> Lines: 168 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -5.4 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 7228 Cc: 7228@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -5.4 (-----) Gilles Espinasse wrote: > Just tested 8.6 on linux glibc-2.11.1/gcc-4.4.5 LFS build on x86, sparc and > ppc > > First a good news is that on sparc (32-bits), 8.6 test suite is now passing > I didn't report yet a failure on misc/stty which was > Failure was > + stty -icanon > stty: standard input: unable to perform all requested operations Is that consistently reproducible? If so, you might want to investigate, but it's probably not a big deal. > The bad news is that it fail now on ppc in FAIL: misc/sort-float > > + LC_ALL=C > + sort -sg > + compare out exp > + diff -u out exp > --- out 2010-10-16 13:40:44.000000000 +0000 > +++ exp 2010-10-16 13:40:44.000000000 +0000 > @@ -2,11 +2,11 @@ > -1.797693e+308 > -3.402823e+38 > -1.175494e-38 > --2.004168e-292 > -2.225074e-308 > +-2.004168e-292 > 0 > -2.225074e-308 > 2.004168e-292 > +2.225074e-308 > 1.175494e-38 > 3.402823e+38 > 1.797693e+308 > + fail=1 > ... > + LC_ALL=fr_FR > + sort -sg > + compare out exp > + diff -u out exp > --- out 2010-10-16 13:40:44.000000000 +0000 > +++ exp 2010-10-16 13:40:44.000000000 +0000 > @@ -2,11 +2,11 @@ > -1,797693e+308 > -3,402823e+38 > -1,175494e-38 > --2,004168e-292 > -2,225074e-308 > +-2,004168e-292 > 0 > -2,225074e-308 > 2,004168e-292 > +2,225074e-308 > 1,175494e-38 > 3,402823e+38 > 1,797693e+308 > + fail=1 > + Exit 1 Thank you for the report. The expected output ("exp") above was generated via this: printf -- "\ -$LDBL_MAX -$DBL_MAX -$FLT_MAX -$FLT_MIN -$DBL_MIN -$LDBL_MIN 0 $LDBL_MIN $DBL_MIN $FLT_MIN $FLT_MAX $DBL_MAX $LDBL_MAX " ... Along with the diff output above, you can see that your system's LDBL_MIN is *larger* than its DBL_MIN. The test did not account for that possibility, since LDBL_MIN is usually smaller than DBL_MIN. We'll adjust the test to allow for that. One way would be to compare $LDBL_MIN and $DBL_MIN manually, extracting and comparing the exponents, the whole part of each mantissa and finally the fractional part of each mantissa, stopping whenever you find a difference. While using awk would be cleaner, it may be more likely to fail for values at the extremes. Apply the following patch and the test should pass: >From 3cce70f0a4fd06954430faf86efd4a53a606a88a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jim Meyering Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 20:18:19 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] tests: sort-float: avoid spurious test failure on ppc64 * tests/misc/sort-float: On systems with DBL_MIN < LDBL_MIN, this test would fail because the expected output was not sorted. Detect that case, and if needed, reverse those two values. --- tests/misc/sort-float | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/misc/sort-float b/tests/misc/sort-float index 639cd7e..f9e0e69 100755 --- a/tests/misc/sort-float +++ b/tests/misc/sort-float @@ -23,6 +23,39 @@ fi . $srcdir/test-lib.sh +# Return 0 if LDBL_MIN is smaller than DBL_MIN, else 1. +# Dissect numbers like these, comparing first exponent, then +# whole part of mantissa, then fraction, until finding enough +# of a difference to determine the relative order of the numbers. +# These are "reversed": +# $ ./getlimits |grep DBL_MIN +# DBL_MIN=2.225074e-308 +# LDBL_MIN=2.004168e-292 +# +# These are in the expected order: +# $ ./getlimits|grep DBL_MIN +# DBL_MIN=2.225074e-308 +# LDBL_MIN=3.362103e-4932 + +dbl_minima_order() +{ + LC_ALL=C getlimits_ + set -- $(echo $LDBL_MIN | tr .e- ' ') + local ldbl_whole=$1 ldbl_frac=$2 ldbl_exp=$3 + + set -- $(echo $DBL_MIN |tr .e- ' ') + local dbl_whole=$1 dbl_frac=$2 dbl_exp=$3 + + test "$dbl_exp" -lt "$ldbl_exp" && return 0 + test "$ldbl_exp" -lt "$dbl_exp" && return 1 + test "$dbl_whole" -lt "$ldbl_whole" && return 0 + test "$ldbl_whole" -lt "$dbl_whole" && return 1 + test "$dbl_frac" -le "$ldbl_frac" && return 0 + return 1 +} + +dbl_minima_order; reversed=$? + for LOC in C $LOCALE_FR; do LC_ALL=$LOC getlimits_ @@ -31,6 +64,14 @@ for LOC in C $LOCALE_FR; do grep '^#define HAVE_C99_STRTOLD 1' $CONFIG_HEADER > /dev/null || { LDBL_MAX="$DBL_MAX"; LDBL_MIN="$DBL_MIN"; } + # If DBL_MIN happens to be smaller than LDBL_MIN, swap them, + # so that out expected output is sorted. + if test $reversed = 1; then + t=$LDBL_MIN + LDBL_MIN=$DBL_MIN + DBL_MIN=$t + fi + printf -- "\ -$LDBL_MAX -$DBL_MAX -- 1.7.3.1.526.g2ee4 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Oct 16 17:15:50 2010 Received: (at 7228) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Oct 2010 21:15:50 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P7E6Y-0005RC-3Y for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 17:15:50 -0400 Received: from smtp3-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.3]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P7E6W-0005R6-3W for 7228@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 17:15:49 -0400 Received: from pii350 (unknown [82.236.101.3]) by smtp3-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 7DA1BA6242; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 23:19:20 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <152a01cb6d77$4cf17720$f9b5a8c0@pii350> From: "Gilles Espinasse" To: "Jim Meyering" References: <14de01cb6d40$fb9f80a0$f9b5a8c0@pii350> <87r5fqdk5z.fsf@meyering.net> Subject: Re: bug#7228: coreutils-8.6 sort-float failure on ppc Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 23:15:45 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.2001 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.2001 X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 7228 Cc: 7228@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Meyering" To: "Gilles Espinasse" Cc: <7228@debbugs.gnu.org> Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 9:14 PM Subject: Re: bug#7228: coreutils-8.6 sort-float failure on ppc > Gilles Espinasse wrote: > > Just tested 8.6 on linux glibc-2.11.1/gcc-4.4.5 LFS build on x86, sparc and > > ppc > > > > First a good news is that on sparc (32-bits), 8.6 test suite is now passing > > I didn't report yet a failure on misc/stty which was > > Failure was > > + stty -icanon > > stty: standard input: unable to perform all requested operations > > Is that consistently reproducible? > If so, you might want to investigate, but it's probably not a big deal. > Each time I run the 8.5 test suite on sparc. Not so easy to reproduce and that disappear now running the test suite with 8.6. I was testing that week looking how to reproduce. At the 5 attempts I try entering the LFS compilation chroot with 8.5, when I try to run 'stty -icanon', it fail the first time but not after the first try. When I reboot, it fail again the first time and not later. I looked with strace and did not see a reason why the first attempt fail and not the second. > > The bad news is that it fail now on ppc in FAIL: misc/sort-float > > It's ok now with the patch on ppc. It's ppc32, not 64 (gcc have --with-long-double-128 option if that matter) Gilles From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Oct 16 19:43:49 2010 Received: (at 7228) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Oct 2010 23:43:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P7GPk-0006PL-W2 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 19:43:49 -0400 Received: from c-67-162-90-113.hsd1.in.comcast.net ([67.162.90.113] helo=kosh.dhis.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P7GPj-0006PF-7y for 7228@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 16 Oct 2010 19:43:47 -0400 Received: (qmail 8151 invoked by uid 1000); 16 Oct 2010 23:47:25 -0000 Message-ID: <20101016234725.8150.qmail@kosh.dhis.org> From: "Alan Curry" Subject: Re: bug#7228: coreutils-8.6 sort-float failure on ppc To: jim@meyering.net (Jim Meyering) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 18:47:25 -0500 (GMT+5) In-Reply-To: <87r5fqdk5z.fsf@meyering.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -0.3 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 7228 Cc: 7228@debbugs.gnu.org, Gilles Espinasse X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Jim Meyering writes: > > Gilles Espinasse wrote: > > Just tested 8.6 on linux glibc-2.11.1/gcc-4.4.5 LFS build on x86, sparc and > > ppc > > > > First a good news is that on sparc (32-bits), 8.6 test suite is now passing > > I didn't report yet a failure on misc/stty which was > > Failure was > > + stty -icanon > > stty: standard input: unable to perform all requested operations > > Is that consistently reproducible? > If so, you might want to investigate, but it's probably not a big deal. I've seen that error message before, and I did investigate. It was caused by glibc's tcsetattr()/tcgetattr() being too clever, trying to support fields that didn't exist in the kernel's termios struct. The kernel struct is arch-specific so it's not surprising that an arch-specific bug would show up here. I've only seen it with speed changes. stty 115200 ) id 1P7NU3-0000sH-Cd for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 17 Oct 2010 03:16:43 -0400 Received: from mx.meyering.net ([82.230.74.64]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P7NU1-0000sC-Ap for 7228@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 17 Oct 2010 03:16:42 -0400 Received: by rho.meyering.net (Acme Bit-Twister, from userid 1000) id 77ACBD86F; Sun, 17 Oct 2010 09:20:20 +0200 (CEST) From: Jim Meyering To: "Gilles Espinasse" Subject: Re: bug#7228: coreutils-8.6 sort-float failure on ppc In-Reply-To: <152a01cb6d77$4cf17720$f9b5a8c0@pii350> (Gilles Espinasse's message of "Sat, 16 Oct 2010 23:15:45 +0200") References: <14de01cb6d40$fb9f80a0$f9b5a8c0@pii350> <87r5fqdk5z.fsf@meyering.net> <152a01cb6d77$4cf17720$f9b5a8c0@pii350> Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 09:20:20 +0200 Message-ID: <877hhhe157.fsf@meyering.net> Lines: 7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -5.4 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 7228 Cc: 7228@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -5.4 (-----) Gilles Espinasse wrote: >> > The bad news is that it fail now on ppc in FAIL: misc/sort-float >> > > It's ok now with the patch on ppc. > It's ppc32, not 64 (gcc have --with-long-double-128 option if that matter) Thanks. Adjusted. I reproduced the failure also on ppc64. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 17 03:17:07 2010 Received: (at 7228) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Oct 2010 07:17:07 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P7NUQ-0000sr-Mr for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 17 Oct 2010 03:17:06 -0400 Received: from mx.meyering.net ([82.230.74.64]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P7NUP-0000sP-2b for 7228@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 17 Oct 2010 03:17:05 -0400 Received: by rho.meyering.net (Acme Bit-Twister, from userid 1000) id AC248DE38; Sun, 17 Oct 2010 09:20:44 +0200 (CEST) From: Jim Meyering To: "Alan Curry" Subject: Re: bug#7228: coreutils-8.6 sort-float failure on ppc In-Reply-To: <20101016234725.8150.qmail@kosh.dhis.org> (Alan Curry's message of "Sat, 16 Oct 2010 18:47:25 -0500 (GMT+5)") References: <14de01cb6d40$fb9f80a0$f9b5a8c0@pii350> <20101016234725.8150.qmail@kosh.dhis.org> Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 09:20:44 +0200 Message-ID: <871v7pe14j.fsf@meyering.net> Lines: 31 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -5.4 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 7228 Cc: 7228@debbugs.gnu.org, Gilles Espinasse X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -5.4 (-----) Alan Curry wrote: > Jim Meyering writes: >> Gilles Espinasse wrote: >> > Just tested 8.6 on linux glibc-2.11.1/gcc-4.4.5 LFS build on x86, sparc and >> > ppc >> > >> > First a good news is that on sparc (32-bits), 8.6 test suite is now passing >> > I didn't report yet a failure on misc/stty which was >> > Failure was >> > + stty -icanon >> > stty: standard input: unable to perform all requested operations >> >> Is that consistently reproducible? >> If so, you might want to investigate, but it's probably not a big deal. > > I've seen that error message before, and I did investigate. It was caused by > glibc's tcsetattr()/tcgetattr() being too clever, trying to support fields > that didn't exist in the kernel's termios struct. The kernel struct is > arch-specific so it's not surprising that an arch-specific bug would show up > here. > > I've only seen it with speed changes. stty 115200 change succesfully, but complains. The kernel termios struct may or may not > have separate speed fields for input and output, but glibc likes to pretend > that they're both there, and somehow stty gets confused by glibc's fakery. > strace doesn't give any clues because it shows the real kernel structures. > > See sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/{speed,tc[gs]etattr}.c in glibc source for the > full ugliness. Thanks for the explanation. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue May 31 17:26:35 2011 Received: (at 7228-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 May 2011 21:26:36 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QRWSR-0002wD-5D for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 31 May 2011 17:26:35 -0400 Received: from mx.meyering.net ([82.230.74.64]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QRWSP-0002w0-DA for 7228-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 31 May 2011 17:26:33 -0400 Received: by rho.meyering.net (Acme Bit-Twister, from userid 1000) id BE62860191; Tue, 31 May 2011 23:26:27 +0200 (CEST) From: Jim Meyering To: "Gilles Espinasse" Subject: Re: bug#7228: coreutils-8.6 sort-float failure on ppc In-Reply-To: <877hhhe157.fsf@meyering.net> (Jim Meyering's message of "Sun, 17 Oct 2010 09:20:20 +0200") References: <14de01cb6d40$fb9f80a0$f9b5a8c0@pii350> <87r5fqdk5z.fsf@meyering.net> <152a01cb6d77$4cf17720$f9b5a8c0@pii350> <877hhhe157.fsf@meyering.net> Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 23:26:27 +0200 Message-ID: <87boyiftoc.fsf@rho.meyering.net> Lines: 10 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 7228-done Cc: 7228-done@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.0 (------) Jim Meyering wrote: > Gilles Espinasse wrote: >>> > The bad news is that it fail now on ppc in FAIL: misc/sort-float >>> > >> It's ok now with the patch on ppc. >> It's ppc32, not 64 (gcc have --with-long-double-128 option if that matter) > > Thanks. Adjusted. I reproduced the failure also on ppc64. This was resolved, afaics, so closing. From unknown Tue Jun 24 01:39:23 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 11:24:04 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator