On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 05:55:59PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 02:41:22PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote:
> The other patch adjusts the test output of rhbz557655. xstrtol seems to
> be behaving differently here. I didn't investigate why yet.
There's a fix for this upstream now:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=567567
> to make the testsuite pass.
> ---
> regressions/rhbz557655-expected.stderr | 8 ++++----
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/regressions/rhbz557655-expected.stderr
b/regressions/rhbz557655-expected.stderr
> index ea560e8..bc62baa 100644
> --- a/regressions/rhbz557655-expected.stderr
> +++ b/regressions/rhbz557655-expected.stderr
> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> -set-memsize: memsize: integer out of range
> -set-memsize: memsize: integer out of range
> -set-memsize: memsize: integer out of range
> -set-memsize: memsize: integer out of range
> +set-memsize: memsize: invalid integer parameter (xstrtol returned 1)
> +set-memsize: memsize: invalid integer parameter (xstrtol returned 1)
> +set-memsize: memsize: invalid integer parameter (xstrtol returned 1)
> +set-memsize: memsize: invalid integer parameter (xstrtol returned 1)
> set-memsize: memsize: invalid integer parameter (xstrtol returned 4)
> set-memsize: memsize: invalid integer parameter (xstrtol returned 2)
> set-memsize: memsize: invalid integer parameter (xstrtol returned 2)
which hopefully means you should be able to drop this patch
from Debian.
Cool, will do so with the next release.
-- Guido