This is the mail archive of the newlib@sourceware.org mailing list for the newlib project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Cygwin strptime() is missing "%s" which strftime() has


On 2017-07-26 13:34, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jul 26 11:27, Brian Inglis wrote:
>> On 2017-07-26 04:49, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> On Jul 25 14:13, Brian Inglis wrote:
>>>> On 2017-07-25 12:52, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>>> On Jul 25 10:47, Brian Inglis wrote:
>>>>>> On 2017-07-25 03:16, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> I don't think we need to use intmax_t at all here.  Checking for
>>>>>>> LLONG_MAX should be sufficient.  However, this is strptime_l.  so you
>>>>>>> should use strtoll_l/strtol_l, just like the rest of the function.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On second thought, do we have to do this at all?  Our time_t is always
>>>>>>> long anyway so using just strtol_l and checking for ERANGE should be
>>>>>>> sufficient:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   int old_errno = _REENT->_errno;
>>>>>>>   sec = strtol_l (buf, &s, 10);
>>>>>>>   int new_errno = _REENT->_errno;
>>>>>>>   _REENT->_errno = old_errno;
>>>>>>>   if (s == buf || new_errno == ERANGE || etc...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +		    BIG_T sec;
>>>>>>>> +		    time_t t;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +		    sec = STRTOBIG (buf, &s, 10);
>>>>>>>> +		    t = (time_t)sec;
>>>>>>>> +		    if (s == buf
>>>>>>>> +			|| (BIG_T)t != sec
>>>>>>>> +			|| localtime_r (&t, timeptr) != timeptr)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is time_t always long on all newlib platforms, or could it be long
>>>>>> long in some environments/memory models e.g. Windows 64 VS/MinGW
>>>>>> LLP64/IL32P64 vs Cygwin/Unix LP64/I32LP64?  Could/should we keep the
>>>>>> strtol[l] options and use the ..._l variants?
>>>>>
>>>>> Well... on *third* thought, targets may redefine time_t via redefining
>>>>> _TIME_T_.  Targets not doing that will get long, so yeah, you're right.
>>>>> Maybe it is safer to use always strtoll_l and just break this down to
>>>>> time_t on the way.
>>>>
>>>> My concern has always been do all newlib RTEMS targets support long
>>>> long, even if same as long, and stroll_l?
>>>
>>> Yes.  The long long functions are not excluded like we do with long
>>> double stuff.
>>>
>>>> Trying to build standalone or combined STC for this with changed strptime.c
>>>> ld/collect2 fails to resolve ...global_locale.
>>>
>>> Yeah, it's an internal function to newlib.  You need to include
>>> libc/locale/setlocale.h somehow to accomplish that.  STC from Cygwin
>>> userspace will do.
>>
>> Not doing it for me: that's why I asked if there were undistributed locale
>> changes in the tree, and maybe in a dev snapshot?
> 
> No, it's an *internal* function, it doesn't get exported.  There's no
> (easy) way to build strptime.c outside the newlib tree as part of the
> lib.  That's why I said a userspace STC is enough.  Don't try to build
> strptime.c as standalone.  Just build it as part of newlib/Cygwin and
> test it from userspace by calling it.

Finally got all the prereqs installed and a clean build.
My configure uses the default prefix /usr/local, which is at the head of my
personal path.
Is that enough for a test build, and how do I do that, or do I have to replace
the current release, with configure --prefix=/, make install into /bin/?

-- 
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]