On 12/08/2018 22:57, Denis Ovsienko wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Aug 2018 20:35:36 +0100 Guy Harris wrote
>
> > On Aug 12, 2018, at 7:06 AM, Francois-Xavier Le Bail
> wrote:
> >
> > > Should we add the "Z" suffix (for UTC) ?
> > > strftime(time_buf, sizeof (time_buf),
On Sun, 12 Aug 2018 20:35:36 +0100 Guy Harris wrote
> On Aug 12, 2018, at 7:06 AM, Francois-Xavier Le Bail
> wrote:
>
> > Should we add the "Z" suffix (for UTC) ?
> > strftime(time_buf, sizeof (time_buf), "%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ", tm);
That's a good point, I used to think
On Aug 12, 2018, at 7:06 AM, Francois-Xavier Le Bail
wrote:
> Should we add the "Z" suffix (for UTC) ?
> strftime(time_buf, sizeof (time_buf), "%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ", tm);
Should we do so in ts_date_hmsfrac_print() as well, if time_flag isn't
LOCAL_TIME?
On 05/08/2018 14:46, Denis Ovsienko wrote:
> That said, if the output uses UTC, it could be helpful to use an unambiguous
> format as well, as in commit 99412d6.
In this commit, there is:
strftime(time_buf, sizeof (time_buf), "%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S", tm);
According to the RFC3339:
Z
Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
>> 2) For tests in TESTLIST, we could build and check the output with
TZ=GMT0 (in TESTrun.sh and
>> update-test.sh).
>> Like that, we could run the tests without the '-t' option and get
problems/changes in time printing
>> functions. Need an update
On 05/08/2018 15:12, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
> 2) For tests in TESTLIST, we could build and check the output with TZ=GMT0
> (in TESTrun.sh and
> update-test.sh).
> Like that, we could run the tests without the '-t' option and get
> problems/changes in time printing
> functions. Need an
On 06/08/2018 22:21, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
> On 06/08/2018 17:17, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
>> On 06/08/2018 15:09, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
>>> On 06/08/2018 14:52, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
On 06/08/2018 10:42, Denis Ovsienko wrote:
> Which reminds us that at
On 06/08/2018 17:17, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
> On 06/08/2018 15:09, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
>> On 06/08/2018 14:52, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
>>> On 06/08/2018 10:42, Denis Ovsienko wrote:
On Sun, 05 Aug 2018 18:21:47 +0100 John Hawkinson
wrote
>
On 06/08/2018 15:09, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
> On 06/08/2018 14:52, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
>> On 06/08/2018 10:42, Denis Ovsienko wrote:
>>> On Sun, 05 Aug 2018 18:21:47 +0100 John Hawkinson
>>> wrote
>>> > Denis Ovsienko wrote on Sun, 5 Aug 2018
>>> > at 17:05:20
On 06/08/2018 14:52, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
> On 06/08/2018 10:42, Denis Ovsienko wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 Aug 2018 18:21:47 +0100 John Hawkinson
>> wrote
>> > Denis Ovsienko wrote on Sun, 5 Aug 2018
>> > at 17:05:20 +0100 in
>>
On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 09:51:36 +0100 John Hawkinson wrote
> Denis Ovsienko wrote on Mon, 6 Aug 2018
> at 09:42:16 +0100 in
> <1650e66b5ad.12b3ab99e15597.8336631397456496...@ovsienko.info>:
>
> > When a network protocol has a timestamp and defines it in UTC (which
> > is
Denis Ovsienko wrote on Mon, 6 Aug 2018
at 09:42:16 +0100 in
<1650e66b5ad.12b3ab99e15597.8336631397456496...@ovsienko.info>:
> When a network protocol has a timestamp and defines it in UTC (which
> is often the case), to me it looks consistent if the host in the
> middle of the exchange (or
On Sun, 05 Aug 2018 18:21:47 +0100 John Hawkinson wrote
> Denis Ovsienko wrote on Sun, 5 Aug 2018
> at 17:05:20 +0100 in
> <1650ad5fd29.b5d2798f311917.536858429581803...@ovsienko.info>:
>
> > It works in an interactive session; but as soon as the output makes
> > it to
Denis Ovsienko wrote on Sun, 5 Aug 2018
at 17:05:20 +0100 in
<1650ad5fd29.b5d2798f311917.536858429581803...@ovsienko.info>:
> It works in an interactive session; but as soon as the output makes
> it to the Internet and stays there long enough, people will no
> longer understand what the
On Sun, 05 Aug 2018 14:12:31 +0100 Francois-Xavier Le Bail
wrote
> On 05/08/2018 14:46, Denis Ovsienko wrote:
> > On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 08:41:10 +0100 Francois-Xavier Le Bail
> > wrote
> > > On 04/08/2018 09:03, Guy Harris wrote:
> > > > On Aug 3, 2018, at 6:44 PM,
On 05/08/2018 15:12, Francois-Xavier Le Bail wrote:
> On 05/08/2018 14:46, Denis Ovsienko wrote:
>> On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 08:41:10 +0100 Francois-Xavier Le Bail
>> wrote
>> > On 04/08/2018 09:03, Guy Harris wrote:
>> > > On Aug 3, 2018, at 6:44 PM, Michael Richardson
>> wrote:
>>
On 05/08/2018 14:46, Denis Ovsienko wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 08:41:10 +0100 Francois-Xavier Le Bail
> wrote
> > On 04/08/2018 09:03, Guy Harris wrote:
> > > On Aug 3, 2018, at 6:44 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> > >
> > >> Guy Harris wrote:
> > >>> Currently, the tcpdump
On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 08:41:10 +0100 Francois-Xavier Le Bail
wrote
> On 04/08/2018 09:03, Guy Harris wrote:
> > On Aug 3, 2018, at 6:44 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> >
> >> Guy Harris wrote:
> >>> Currently, the tcpdump tests for AFS fail if you're not in the time
> >>> zone
On 04/08/2018 09:03, Guy Harris wrote:
> On Aug 3, 2018, at 6:44 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
>> Guy Harris wrote:
>>> Currently, the tcpdump tests for AFS fail if you're not in the time
>>> zone where the .out files were generated, because AFS time stamps are
>>> printed as local time
On 04/08/2018 03:14, Guy Harris wrote:
> Currently, the tcpdump tests for AFS fail if you're not in the time zone
> where the .out files were generated, because AFS time stamps are printed as
> local time rather than as UTC.
>
> Should we run the tcpdump tests with TZ=GMT0 (at least on UN*X),
On Aug 3, 2018, at 6:44 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Guy Harris wrote:
>> Currently, the tcpdump tests for AFS fail if you're not in the time
>> zone where the .out files were generated, because AFS time stamps are
>> printed as local time rather than as UTC.
>
> That's broken
So we should
Guy Harris wrote:
> Currently, the tcpdump tests for AFS fail if you're not in the time
> zone where the .out files were generated, because AFS time stamps are
> printed as local time rather than as UTC.
That's broken
> Should we run the tcpdump tests with TZ=GMT0 (at least on
Currently, the tcpdump tests for AFS fail if you're not in the time zone where
the .out files were generated, because AFS time stamps are printed as local
time rather than as UTC.
Should we run the tcpdump tests with TZ=GMT0 (at least on UN*X), so that all
time stamps are interpreted as UTC?
23 matches
Mail list logo
