Comment 22 for bug 1940996
Revision history for this message
|
|
#22 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
bbfa235
(Get the code!)
Sorry, actually both regbug.c and rebug2.c fail as they return the exit status 1 (with my usual configuration, my prompt shows any non-zero exit status, but this is not the case of the machine on which I had done the test, so that I missed the failure initially):
vinc17@gcc92:~$ ./regbug
vinc17@gcc92:~$ echo $?
1
vinc17@gcc92:~$ ./rebug2
vinc17@gcc92:~$ echo $?
1
However, in the test from Paolo Bonzini's bug report (comment 0), grep no longer crashes (while it still crashes with glibc 2.34, which does not have the fix).
regbug.c is derived from the attachment in Bug#17356 (as said in comment 5). I've tested this original testcase: with glibc 2.34 on x86_64, it crashes (segmentation fault); with glibc 2.35 on riscv64 (host gcc92), it outputs "no match (incorrect)".
So it seems that the fix mentioned in comment 13 fixed the crashes (which was the initial bug report), but not the misbehavior.
Now, with these new details, is it still OK to regard this bug as fixed and that the misbehavior (rebug.c from Bug#17356; regbug.c and rebug2.c from this bug) is actually a new bug?