Comment 27 for bug 1109327

(In reply to comment #17)
> Apologies for jumping on your reply. I did read the whole thing but didn't get
> what you intended the message to be, and the whole history of this bug has been
> folks misquoting text that has nothing to do with the non-long %s format in the
> non-wide printf functions to justify the buggy behavior... :-(

I had been assuming that the bug was introduced by copying the wprintf()
implementation for reuse in printf() --- i.e., no misunderstanding of the
standard but just simple operator error.

But actually the patch introducing the regression (40c014b3, "Correct
handling of multibyte character strings in %s format with precision",
2000-07-22) only affected vsnprintf() and co. The changelog comment
makes no sense. There is no explanation on libc-alpha@ or libc-hacker@
from around that time. It looks like a simple, unilateral, bad decision.

There's a patch identical to yours complete with changelog and copyright
assignment at <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-hacker/2010-08/msg00009.html>.
It just reverts 40c014b3. It was ignored. A story from a worse time.

Thanks for fixing it.