From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 21695 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2022 02:42:46 -0000 Received: from second.openwall.net (193.110.157.125) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 23 Jul 2022 02:42:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 3363 invoked by uid 550); 23 Jul 2022 02:42:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 3325 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2022 02:42:43 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1658544151; bh=hfRL91qi5L5AkpgnlaPEOw5B/3jSVqHr6CLxf/JzqOQ=; h=Subject:From:To:Date:From; b=gmQlagZ4OrVjl55ajDF85ISXGCpZMc71Y/XXiq3DcOKdOZLxc28JunTxDSQ02zVwg m/J6HO0FbAmWZZ2Z9K2QxCw6oXS8+Gmsgk7htMiQAwCtI6pCY1yE0Z6Rn0KWROebDn lR1y9pRSQyPiswgdeBT4HnczWRf6vHi0zl/vyrgFg/CU9yCpCcF6h8CiNFP25BAz+v BFal0JNcFo//gMsBYfqXodC3RqmZY5RfDq2/zwrSYFJ1bTy2yLg/ST8edCNVgaUCR7 hMgJIsG4uT4ttlyx27e6FYTLTDBB5gtDJ4XmvitJrMwtrjgPAKRni6RoQjsTOIv4Ti HM7jJ7hB+A0qQ== Message-ID: <5dc0a7909c10f111f8cd73741a00821863531e30.camel@posteo.net> From: John Scott To: musl@lists.openwall.com Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2022 02:42:21 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20220723022720.GD7074@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20220723022720.GD7074@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Jabber-ID: pert@member.fsf.org Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-c4oIVz6uKza2EsWepQwW" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [musl] Feature request: strftime() should set errno on failure --=-c4oIVz6uKza2EsWepQwW Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2022-07-22 at 22:27 -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > In particular this does not say 0 can be returned for any error > condition, only that 0 must be returned if the result does not fit, > and that otherwise the return value must be the number of bytes placed > in the array as a successful result. Moreover, "No errors are > defined." which forbids implementations from even defining their own > implementation-defined errors. Thank you for bringing this to my attention, you are of course absolutely right. In other words, as long as one provides a large enough buffer, strftime() is required to succeed. I hereby retract my feature request :) --=-c4oIVz6uKza2EsWepQwW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iIgEABYIADAWIQSiPzylvTnZ6xisfzWz9N0oYfTNugUCYttgDhIcanNjb3R0QHBv c3Rlby5uZXQACgkQs/TdKGH0zboLLgEA0U3Y1iX1JiXP+0CkD5Pg/ho3dLwPF8uZ 9jcboe9oKNEBALJxSr/RAeyG/0qfI4s62JRdxhgf/4LxSevDywS8okUN =h5Ng -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-c4oIVz6uKza2EsWepQwW--