Austin Group Defect Tracker

Aardvark Mark IV

Viewing Issue Simple Details Jump to Notes ] Issue History ] Print ]
ID Category Severity Type Date Submitted Last Update
0000954 [1003.1(2008)/Issue 7] System Interfaces Objection Enhancement Request 2015-06-04 00:54 2016-02-25 16:50
Reporter wpollock View Status public  
Assigned To ajosey
Priority normal Resolution Duplicate  
Status Closed  
Name Wayne Pollock
User Reference
Section strftime
Page Number 2024
Line Number 64641-64642
Interp Status ---
Final Accepted Text
Summary 0000954: Add %s to strftime
Description strftime in <time.h> is the standard way to format time data, and its use is specified for the date(1) utility. While there are other interfaces that can produce the number of seconds since the epoch, strftime is the correct place for this. Currently some implementations (such as glibc) provide this.

Related to 169, 466.

(Should be tagged for issue 8.)
Desired Action Change:

R Replaced by the time in 24-hour notation (%H:%M). [tm_hour, tm_min]
S Replaced by the second as a decimal number [00,60]. [tm_sec]


R Replaced by the time in 24-hour notation (%H:%M). [tm_hour, tm_min]
s Replaced by the number of seconds since the Epoch,
  1970-01-01 00:00:00 +0000 (UTC), corrected for timezone and
  any seasonal time adjustments (see XBD Seconds Since the Epoch)
S Replaced by the second as a decimal number [00,60]. [tm_sec]

(Note that if approved, this will also update the description of the date(1) utility.)
Tags No tags attached.
Attached Files

- Relationships
related to 0000169Closedajosey date utility needs ``%s'' 

-  Notes
geoffclare (manager)
2015-06-04 08:35

This addition is already being made via 0000169. (That bug only requested %s be added to the date utility, but the resolution in Note: 0000283 adds it to strftime() and strptime() as well.)
geoffclare (manager)
2015-06-04 08:46

Looking again at 0000169 it seems that we may have missed something: what should strftime() do in cases where %s is used and mktime() would return -1. I think there should be a "may fail" EOVERFLOW error along these lines:

EOVERFLOW The format string includes a %s conversion and the number of seconds since the Epoch cannot be represented in a time_t.

Note that the RETURN VALUE section will also need updating if this error is added.
geoffclare (manager)
2016-02-25 16:50

This is being closed as a duplicate. The resolution for 0000169 has been updated to include the additions from Note: 0002693.

- Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
2015-06-04 00:54 wpollock New Issue
2015-06-04 00:54 wpollock Status New => Under Review
2015-06-04 00:54 wpollock Assigned To => ajosey
2015-06-04 00:54 wpollock Name => Wayne Pollock
2015-06-04 00:54 wpollock Section => strftime
2015-06-04 00:54 wpollock Page Number => 2024
2015-06-04 00:54 wpollock Line Number => 64641-64642
2015-06-04 08:31 geoffclare Relationship added related to 0000169
2015-06-04 08:35 geoffclare Note Added: 0002692
2015-06-04 08:46 geoffclare Note Added: 0002693
2016-02-25 16:50 geoffclare Interp Status => ---
2016-02-25 16:50 geoffclare Note Added: 0003087
2016-02-25 16:50 geoffclare Status Under Review => Closed
2016-02-25 16:50 geoffclare Resolution Open => Duplicate

Mantis 1.1.6[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2008 Mantis Group
Powered by Mantis Bugtracker