On 29/07/2025 06:02, Jeffery Palm wrote:
I took a look at this bug, and believe I have a patch that will resolve it.
$ ../src/date --debug -d '2024-01-01 8:00:00PM -0500'
date: parsed date part: (Y-M-D) 2024-01-01
date: parsed time part: 08:00:00pm UTC-05
date: input timezone: parsed date/time string (-05)
date: using specified time as starting value: '20:00:00'
date: starting date/time: '(Y-M-D) 2024-01-01 20:00:00 TZ=-05'
date: '(Y-M-D) 2024-01-01 20:00:00 TZ=-05' = 1704157200 epoch-seconds
date: timezone: system default
date: final: 1704157200.000000000 (epoch-seconds)
date: final: (Y-M-D) 2024-01-02 01:00:00 (UTC)
date: final: (Y-M-D) 2024-01-01 17:00:00 (UTC-08)
date: output format: ‘%a %d %b %Y %T %Z’
Mon 01 Jan 2024 17:00:00 PST
And I was able to run the coreutils testsuite with no tests failing:
============================================================================
Testsuite summary for GNU coreutils 9.7.174-083f8
============================================================================
# TOTAL: 533
# PASS: 476
# SKIP: 57
# XFAIL: 0
# FAIL: 0
# XPASS: 0
# ERROR: 0
============================================================================
Are there any other tests/changes I should consider for this?
Below is the patch for the changes I made for this, including a new
testcase for AM/PM with timezone.
--- a/lib/parse-datetime.y
+++ b/lib/parse-datetime.y
@@ -592,7 +592,7 @@ debug_print_relative_time (char const *item,
parser_control const *pc)
%token tYEAR_UNIT tMONTH_UNIT tHOUR_UNIT tMINUTE_UNIT tSEC_UNIT
%token <intval> tDAY_UNIT tDAY_SHIFT
-%token <intval> tDAY tDAYZONE tLOCAL_ZONE tMERIDIAN
+%token <intval> tDAY tDAYZONE tLOCAL_ZONE tMERIDIAN tMERIDIAN_WITH_ZONE
%token <intval> tMONTH tORDINAL tZONE
%token <textintval> tSNUMBER tUNUMBER
@@ -698,6 +698,27 @@ time:
set_hhmmss (pc, $1.value, $3.value, $5.tv_sec, $5.tv_nsec);
pc->meridian = $6;
}
+ | tUNUMBER tMERIDIAN_WITH_ZONE tSNUMBER o_colon_minutes
+ {
+ set_hhmmss (pc, $1.value, 0, 0, 0);
+ pc->meridian = $2;
+ pc->zones_seen++;
+ if (! time_zone_hhmm (pc, $3, $4)) YYABORT;
+ }
+ | tUNUMBER ':' tUNUMBER tMERIDIAN_WITH_ZONE tSNUMBER o_colon_minutes
+ {
+ set_hhmmss (pc, $1.value, $3.value, 0, 0);
+ pc->meridian = $4;
+ pc->zones_seen++;
+ if (! time_zone_hhmm (pc, $5, $6)) YYABORT;
+ }
+ | tUNUMBER ':' tUNUMBER ':' unsigned_seconds tMERIDIAN_WITH_ZONE
tSNUMBER o_colon_minutes
+ {
+ set_hhmmss (pc, $1.value, $3.value, $5.tv_sec, $5.tv_nsec);
+ pc->meridian = $6;
+ pc->zones_seen++;
+ if (! time_zone_hhmm (pc, $7, $8)) YYABORT;
+ }
| iso_8601_time
;
@@ -1527,14 +1548,19 @@ yylex (union YYSTYPE *lvalp, parser_control *pc)
*p = '\0';
tp = lookup_word (pc, buff);
- if (! tp)
+ if (tp)
{
- if (debugging (pc))
- dbg_printf (_("error: unknown word '%s'\n"), buff);
- return '?';
+ lvalp->intval = tp->value;
+ if (tp->type == tMERIDIAN)
+ {
+ char const *p = pc->input;
Better to use a non shadowing name here ^
+ while (*p && c_isspace (*p))
+ p++;
+ if (*p == '-' || *p == '+')
+ return tMERIDIAN_WITH_ZONE;
+ }
+ return tp->type;
}
- lvalp->intval = tp->value;
- return tp->type;
}
if (c != '(')
diff --git a/tests/test-parse-datetime.c b/tests/test-parse-datetime.c
index 546b383c55..9766ed7a13 100644
--- a/tests/test-parse-datetime.c
+++ b/tests/test-parse-datetime.c
@@ -335,6 +335,15 @@ main (_GL_UNUSED int argc, char **argv)
ASSERT (result.tv_sec == result2.tv_sec
&& result.tv_nsec == result2.tv_nsec);
+ /* Check that timeone works with AM/PM */
+ p = "2024-01-01 8PM -08:00";
+ expected.tv_sec = 1704168000;
+ expected.tv_nsec = 0;
+ ASSERT (parse_datetime (&result, p, NULL));
+ LOG (p, expected, result);
+ ASSERT (expected.tv_sec == result.tv_sec
+ && expected.tv_nsec == result.tv_nsec);
+
/* TZ out of range should cause parse_datetime failure */
now.tv_sec = SOME_TIMEPOINT + 4711;
Thanks for looking at this.
This changes relative handling unfortunately:
$ src/date --debug -d '2024-01-01 8:00:00PM -5 days'
date: parsed date part: (Y-M-D) 2024-01-01
date: parsed time part: 08:00:00pm UTC-05
date: parsed relative part: +1 day(s)
...
Wed 03 Jan 2024 01:00:00 GMT
$ date --debug -d '2024-01-01 8:00:00PM -5 days'
date: parsed date part: (Y-M-D) 2024-01-01
date: parsed time part: 08:00:00pm
date: parsed relative part: -5 day(s)
...
Wed 27 Dec 2023 20:00:00 GMT
Now there is an existing ambiguity here,
where the AM/PM induces the relative interpretation:
$ date --debug -d '2024-01-01 8:00:00PM -5 days'
date: parsed date part: (Y-M-D) 2024-01-01
date: parsed time part: 08:00:00pm
date: parsed relative part: -5 day(s)
$ date --debug -d '2024-01-01 8:00:00 -5 days'
date: parsed date part: (Y-M-D) 2024-01-01
date: parsed time part: 08:00:00 UTC-05
date: parsed relative part: +1 day(s)
BTW https://bugs.gnu.org/79078 was a recent bug report
along the same lines of the relative part being unexpectedly
considered as a timezone offset
Now I agree we're already inconsistent in this regard, but I'm sure
folks are relying on the AM/PM inducing a relative interpretation.
If we were trying to make all this more consistent, IMHO
we should change things so that we always interpret +|-<int> <days|minutes|...>
as a relative adjustment, whereas your change does the opposite for the AM/PM
case.
cheers,
Padraig
