Re: vfprintf, scanf portability

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Bruno Haible wrote on Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 09:16:53PM CET:
> Paul Eggert wrote:
> > http://buildlogs.pld-linux.org/index.php?dist=th&arch=athlon&ok=1&name=gcc&id=78974776-f08b-4b31-a977-863793c73c22&action=text
> 
> This log is inconsistent: In line 872 it shows
> 
>   checking for strrchr... checking for vfprintf... yes
>   yes
> 
> and then in line 893:
> 
>   checking for vfprintf... no
> 
> > http://buildd.emdebian.org/~zumbi/toolchain/squeeze/i386/logs/i386-sparc-gcc-4.4.log
> 
> Likewise inconsistent: In line 3099
> 
>   checking for vfprintf... no
> 
> and in line 3346
> 
>   checking whether gcc supports -Wwrite-strings... checking for vfprintf... 
> yes
> 
> I guess it was a user error in both cases, such as running several configures
> in parallel in the same directory, or botched configure.ac files.

These logs look like they come from GCC builds.  They may run several
configure scripts in parallel, but in different directories.  It's just
the output that is intermingled.  They may also run configure scripts
for the build, host, and target compilers, which can explain
inconsistencies.  Target systems might be pretty bare bones freestanding
systems.  OTOH, the two logs don't seem like the "vfprintf ... no"
answer came from a target directory.  Still, I wouldn't put much weight
in these without seeing the actual config.log snippet for why these
failed; GCC has libiberty which provides a vfprintf.c.

Cheers,
Ralf