OK, let me try that one more time if you put -s "string" into busybox it interprets the string as if the -s were not there, in other words as a default format string. if you put -s "string" into big date, it accepts the string, but parses it in a completely different way.
THEREFORE. It does no-one any service for busybox to accept and ignore the -s string. If the command was intended only for busybox - it's meaningless If the command has been ported across from big date, the string will not be interpreted in a compatible manner, so appearing to accept it was unhelpful. Better to barf with a "'-s' not supported" message. D In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Denys Vlasenko) wrote: > *From:* Denys Vlasenko <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] > *CC:* [email protected] > *Date:* Mon, 17 Jan 2011 14:16:28 +0100 > > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:29 PM, David Collier > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Just a thought... > > > > busybox seems to ignore the -s switch on date. > > It doesn't ignore it: date -s DATETIME does set time. > > > However - for the separately compiled "date" I looked at, -s > > switches the > > date format over to something completely different. > > > > so > > > > date -s "...." > > > > would work under busybox, but give an error under Linux... > > To paraphrase more clearly: > > Bbox date treats > date DATETIME > and > date -s DATETIME > essentially the same (except for the MMDDhhmm[[CC]YY][.ss] case, > which is supported only without -s). > > Coreutils date supports both formats, but uses different syntaxes > for DATETIME in them. > > Why is this a problem? > > > even when > > > > date "same string" > > > > would actually work fine under Linux > > > > Is there an argument for busybox rejecting the -s option as > > "unimplemented" since we don't implement the data format it > > implies??? > > What data format does it imply? > > And again, want to clarify: bbox date is more restrictive, and > possibly > in some cases incompatible regarding DATETIME formats it accepts. > I think the solution to that is to carefully extend the set of > accepted formats. > > Tell me which format do you feel bbox date needs to be extended to > support? > > -- > vda > _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
