On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 12:51:24PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> > This bug is causing these failures:
> > > "%+3C": expected "+20", got "020"
> > > "%+11F": expected "+2016-01-03", got "02016-01-03"
> > > "%+5G": expected "+2015", got "02015"
> > > "%+5Y": expected "+2016", got "02016"
> > > "%+5Y": expected "+0000", got "00000"
> 
> I'll need to look over how to change the logic to match the desired
> behavior but it shouldn't be hard.

Attaching a patch I intend to push if I don't find any problems, and
the one I've already got queued up for the %F issue. Let me know if
you see any issues with them.

Rich