From: Carlos Santos <unixmania@gmail.com>
To: Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>
Cc: J William Piggott <elseifthen@gmx.com>, util-linux@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] util-linux v2.35
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 13:38:37 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJ4jsaf+s71UB9YOS_jeAn79t=2vSsY+7b-UvGPUEne87+ohPQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200127161317.wwyupvqbighx3rqx@ws.net.home>
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 1:13 PM Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 11:59:59AM -0500, J William Piggott wrote:
> > You do realize that I had to heavily modify that file to remove its
> > gnulib dependencies (because you said no to gnulib). If I recall
>
> I know, this is why we keep it in the tree (and thanks for all the
> work!).
>
> > correctly I had newer and older versions to chose from and picked that
> > one due to it having the most bugs fixed while still being practical to
> > strip its gnulib dependence.
> >
> > The reasons for making the change were:
> > * remove hwclock's dependence on date(1)
> > * remove an insecure call to date(1)
> > * I thought there would be to many complaints if the accepted input
> > date formats were changed
> >
> > As to the last bullet point; personally I think having the --date option
> > accept every date syntax know to history is nonsense.
>
> Yes, I agree it's probably overkill.
>
> > Or you could just use the existing utillinux date parser.
>
> This is what I have implemented for --disable-hwclock-gplv3 to have
> anything ASAP for the next 2.35.1 update... Maybe we can make it the
> default for the next release v2.36 and later remove the gnulib code at
> all.
>
> > The question is, do you want to deal with any pushback for
> > changing the long established accepted --date formats?
>
> IMHO the existing utillinux date parser is good enough, but I have no
> clue how people use --date.
This is a bit disturbing. People should know in advance what date/time
formats hwclock supports. They should be described in the man page, at
least in a simple statement like “the suported date formats are the
same as foo(3)”. Leaving it to be guessed by users, either reading the
source code or testing at run-time does not make sense. The man page
does not even mention Documentation/parse-date.txt.
--
Carlos Santos <unixmania@gmail.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-27 16:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-21 10:57 [ANNOUNCE] util-linux v2.35 Karel Zak
2020-01-24 19:16 ` Carlos Santos
2020-01-25 10:51 ` Karel Zak
2020-01-25 11:19 ` Carlos Santos
2020-01-26 16:59 ` J William Piggott
2020-01-26 17:50 ` Carlos Santos
2020-01-27 16:13 ` Karel Zak
2020-01-27 16:38 ` Carlos Santos [this message]
2020-01-27 20:18 ` Karel Zak
2020-01-27 13:34 ` Karel Zak
2020-01-27 13:40 ` Karel Zak
2020-01-27 15:25 ` Karel Zak
2020-01-27 16:29 ` Carlos Santos
2020-01-27 20:21 ` Karel Zak
2020-01-28 19:24 ` Sami Kerola
2020-01-30 11:17 ` Karel Zak
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAJ4jsaf+s71UB9YOS_jeAn79t=2vSsY+7b-UvGPUEne87+ohPQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=unixmania@gmail.com \
--cc=elseifthen@gmx.com \
--cc=kzak@redhat.com \
--cc=util-linux@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).