On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:16 PM, David Collier
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Walter,
>
> Denys
>
> So the posix spec is the one that has recently been deleted. I guess that
> enhances the argument for supporting it.
I looked at the code more closely and guess what? It is _already_ supported:
coreutils/date.c:
if (!(opt & (OPT_SET | OPT_DATE))) {
opt |= OPT_SET;
date_str = argv[0]; /* can be NULL */
if (date_str) {
#if ENABLE_FEATURE_DATE_COMPAT
int len = strspn(date_str, "0123456789");
if (date_str[len] == '\0'
|| (date_str[len] == '.'
&& isdigit(date_str[len+1])
&& isdigit(date_str[len+2])
&& date_str[len+3] == '\0'
)
) {
/* Dreaded MMDDhhmm[[CC]YY][.ss] format!
* It does not match -d or -s format.
* Some users actually do use it.
*/
len -= 8;
if (len < 0 || len > 4 || (len & 1))
bb_error_msg_and_die(bb_msg_invalid_date, date_str);
if (len != 0) { /* move YY or CCYY to front */
char buf[4];
memcpy(buf, date_str + 8, len);
memmove(date_str + len, date_str, 8);
memcpy(date_str, buf, len);
}
}
#endif
argv++;
}
}
I just checked: it is present in 1.18.x releases and seems to work.
I added
bb_error_msg_and_die("date_str:'%s'", date_str);
just above #endif and I see the following:
$ ./busybox date 112201022134.03
date: date_str:'213411220102.03'
$ ./busybox date 112201022134
date: date_str:'213411220102'
$ ./busybox date 1122010234
date: date_str:'3411220102'
What is the problem?
--
vda
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
