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