bc(1) bug?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

bc(1) bug?

Walter Alejandro Iglesias-3
Hello everyone,

Lately I noticed that using bc(1) interactively I have to hit Enter
twice to get the result of an operation printed on screen.  Plus, a new
empty line is printed below the result.  Example:

$ bc
2 + 1      (after hitting Enter twice the two lines below get printed)
3

2 + 2      (idem)
4

quit
$

I can reproduce it in xterm and tty console.

(OpenBSD 6.5-current (GENERIC.MP) #125: Thu Jul 11 02:20:04 MDT 2019
    [hidden email]:/usr/src/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC.MP)


        Walter

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: bc(1) bug?

Ingo Schwarze
Hi Walter,

Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote on Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 09:57:11PM +0200:

> Lately I noticed that using bc(1) interactively I have to hit Enter
> twice to get the result of an operation printed on screen.  Plus, a new
> empty line is printed below the result.  Example:
>
> $ bc
> 2 + 1      (after hitting Enter twice the two lines below get printed)
> 3
>
> 2 + 2      (idem)
> 4
>
> quit
> $
>
> I can reproduce it in xterm and tty console.
>
> (OpenBSD 6.5-current (GENERIC.MP) #125: Thu Jul 11 02:20:04 MDT 2019
>     [hidden email]:/usr/src/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC.MP)

To me, that smells a bit like it *might* be a variation of what
got fixed with

  https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=156293980006370

  Date:       2019-07-12 13:56:28

Can you still reproduce with a kernel compiled after that commit?

By the way, i cannot reproduce your issue.

Yours,
  Ingo

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: bc(1) bug?

Walter Alejandro Iglesias-3
Hi Ingo,

On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 11:09:40PM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:

> Hi Walter,
>
> Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote on Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 09:57:11PM +0200:
>
> > Lately I noticed that using bc(1) interactively I have to hit Enter
> > twice to get the result of an operation printed on screen.  Plus, a new
> > empty line is printed below the result.  Example:
> >
> > $ bc
> > 2 + 1      (after hitting Enter twice the two lines below get printed)
> > 3
> >
> > 2 + 2      (idem)
> > 4
> >
> > quit
> > $
> >
> > I can reproduce it in xterm and tty console.
> >
> > (OpenBSD 6.5-current (GENERIC.MP) #125: Thu Jul 11 02:20:04 MDT 2019
> >     [hidden email]:/usr/src/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC.MP)
>
> To me, that smells a bit like it *might* be a variation of what
> got fixed with
>
>   https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=156293980006370
>
>   Date:       2019-07-12 13:56:28
>
> Can you still reproduce with a kernel compiled after that commit?

You mean the problem could be in the kernel.  Do you think it'll help to
isolate the problem if I compile a newer kernel under the same userland
or upgrading to a newer snapshot is enough?

>
> By the way, i cannot reproduce your issue.
>
> Yours,
>   Ingo


        Walter

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: bc(1) bug?

Ingo Schwarze
Hi Walter,

Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote on Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 03:10:13PM +0200:
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 11:09:40PM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote on Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 09:57:11PM +0200:

>>> Lately I noticed that using bc(1) interactively I have to hit Enter
>>> twice to get the result of an operation printed on screen.  Plus, a new
>>> empty line is printed below the result.  Example:
>>>
>>> $ bc
>>> 2 + 1      (after hitting Enter twice the two lines below get printed)
>>> 3
>>>
>>> 2 + 2      (idem)
>>> 4
>>>
>>> quit
>>> $
>>>
>>> I can reproduce it in xterm and tty console.
>>>
>>> (OpenBSD 6.5-current (GENERIC.MP) #125: Thu Jul 11 02:20:04 MDT 2019
>>>     [hidden email]:/usr/src/sys/arch/amd64/compile/GENERIC.MP)

>> To me, that smells a bit like it *might* be a variation of what
>> got fixed with
>>
>>   https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=156293980006370
>>
>>   Date:       2019-07-12 13:56:28
>>
>> Can you still reproduce with a kernel compiled after that commit?

> You mean the problem could be in the kernel.

I'm not sure, but yes, that's my suspicion.

> Do you think it'll help to isolate the problem if I compile a newer
> kernel under the same userland or upgrading to a newer snapshot is enough?

If my hunch happens to be correct, either way is likely to solve
your problem, and just upgrading to a newer snapshot is obviously
the simpler way.

Yours,
  Ingo