Sure.... But as I stated, this is not a "fix", it's a "hack" to make it work. I'ts in the documentation, and I think there is a very small chance anybody will look at that.

Untar the glibc-packet, patch it and re-tar before doing a "make".

diff -ur glibc-2.1.3 glibc-2.1.3.new/
diff -ur glibc-2.1.3/manual/stdio.texi glibc-2.1.3.new/manual/stdio.texi
--- glibc-2.1.3/manual/stdio.texi Wed Feb 23 08:02:56 2000
+++ glibc-2.1.3.new/manual/stdio.texi Sun Oct 6 14:46:39 2002
@@ -2487,8 +2487,10 @@
If you are trying to read input that doesn't match a single, fixed
pattern, you may be better off using a tool such as Flex to generate a
lexical scanner, or Bison to generate a parser, rather than using
-@code{scanf}. For more information about these tools, see @ref{, , ,
-flex.info, Flex: The Lexical Scanner Generator}, and @ref{, , ,
+@code{scanf}. For more information about these tools, see @ref{Low-Level
+I/O, , ,
+flex.info, Flex: The Lexical Scanner Generator}, and @ref{Low-Level I/O, ,
+,
bison.info, The Bison Reference Manual}.

@node Input Conversion Syntax

Marius (Escort Cab + Mark II)