From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 28 14:14:31 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7AC17AC3; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:14:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from f10.opsec.eu (f10.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200:4::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3541C12E; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:14:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pi by f10.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.84 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Xj7XW-000B8E-4P; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 15:14:26 +0100 Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 15:14:26 +0100 From: Kurt Jaeger To: Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= Subject: Re: svn commit: r273734 - head/bin/dd Message-ID: <20141028141426.GA42752@f10.opsec.eu> References: <201410271138.s9RBcHrA002447@svn.freebsd.org> <20141027153957.GZ1877@kib.kiev.ua> <20141027155427.GM1492@f10.opsec.eu> <86vbn4egjt.fsf@nine.des.no> <86r3xseepw.fsf@nine.des.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <86r3xseepw.fsf@nine.des.no> Cc: Konstantin Belousov , svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Kurt Jaeger X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:14:31 -0000 Hi! > Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes: > > Kurt Jaeger writes: > > > I do not have a working arm setup right now. > > This is a bug on all platforms, and both clang and (recent) gcc should > > complain about it. That printf() call will print garbage. > > Correction: it will print garbage on 32-bit platforms, where sizeof(int) > != sizeof(intmax_t), but clang and gcc should still emit a warning. Yes. I'm old enough to remember the mess in C when going from 16bit to 32bit that I should have paid attention to the test case on 32bit, but my stupidity won 8-( Right now the submitter tests on 32bit and if time permits, I'll experiment on ARM as well. Sorry again for the mess. -- pi@FreeBSD.org +49 171 3101372 6 years to go !