From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/12466 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Dennis_W=c3=b6lfing?= Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Bugs in strftime Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 17:10:02 +0100 Message-ID: <3ab1a8cb-1df0-4345-e16e-d596bfd4ad82@gmx.de> References: <52570ac7-4ba2-0c7a-04b8-c1c9727a5509@gmx.de> <20180205175124.GZ1627@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1517933289 7174 195.159.176.226 (6 Feb 2018 16:08:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 16:08:09 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2 To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-12482-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Tue Feb 06 17:08:04 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ej5mp-0001Gm-9s for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2018 17:07:59 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 12017 invoked by uid 550); 6 Feb 2018 16:10:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 11976 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2018 16:09:58 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20180205175124.GZ1627@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:2tDQZy7yCoPVQFxXHZ1NOEHJfMROy6xM0/AM31segc75AxDWJ8E KaR6Jhgv6+ZUiqcaHyT9fvjEKFsPrFhUGlphjRFgwoXfffBykKRqhCV82aLPRM1wfZxHmza VCrImPdVzYT8OvbRCBxVQzENmxiYt0IYJWZ3arPCk87dtDa6+e39icDklt5O5Te216vDH4+ fEpVw5rI+mXvjIOmtAd1g== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:pFZuiY8Rk4c=:wZ6ca6dPxLBcp4hM/U7DsM sBB3nu7lLsbUlgOL/OOnTlMrPBE93Z0ZtQ1CUx6Tb2o38noESv08WABx2tpY/JLO+0h4L8Ica NJ6eyTyqpzy76uNCNO9j11+1OmqF2NgQCJlHGO9y0zymMiRDDjrQtNtkwAJWuqh+44o9phcTy K4V00TVUyWxJ7Yv4BF7bLSiPV1tP5V10igZKzPrbenBh2ShscxuXlvF+jmCKxb8Y4zxI3NcbW b9XQ5VFHU4bdDVdpLjwAZ5kCqSiLSdb/O4vChMEpRHA4ORrAf2kL3oVWBIWtjuXm5rRzlRw9g 4JNrrYL0vIvjaCb+kXa0hh28trcUST2T3oRHPKX+v0lxEH7Jlv2ObpHs6s96fPydkJytCE2dM U7LtYLGU4HlSUEUPqJUOrKT5PnCVIUnb6jvJ26UnHKGWGr7fniiD88yGyT6DT7pYaFepGkyFh 0B8O8J3jiGba4hlduUlhpDEPQeV0XMKrrPO2VkJfLH/MrPRgnMnkj6dEU/jlWLTYPWeECaAVq LcqOKpa1Jqo4S3oLsKDj0ochIN0QPEjMb3xWYPJkWx7xsBxPxED39ZCj1MP4+su0qAXKbkRwL z0CKs/9Vm2nMG4SEkgE5DTSKUYx5GNmun9fN6bLhE/BArnAZhhWrpaAjKb2YfGY53T3xU9TZZ UW6WX3yHkrlcIOFnYEU0d6/I1rfS1aV4Qq/8QWKtcF3PfPEVw5ccaEAD1RR4TKQBuI1lHsQP7 ckggY5eNqd7jDMW/Og+RwriaOttCpYkXl70J8Hm89v6KdRGjrP7pftUqScpUWlAU9VNCo2P3 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:12466 Archived-At: On 05.02.2018 18:51, Rich Felker wrote: > I've actually discussed this before, being doubtful about whether the > current behavior was correct, but was unable to find any authoritative > interpretation. Do you know if there is one? Unfortunately I don't know of any. I don't think that the standard explicitly defines what "field" means. However the standard also uses the term "minimum field width". It would be weird to interpret the text in a way that "minimum field width" refers to a different "field" than "the field being produced". > Thanks again for doing this testing and reporting it. Would you be > interested in helping get these tests into our libc-test package? Sure. What do I need to do for that?