On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 10:56:06AM +0200, Christoph Biedl wrote: > Elliott Mitchell wrote... > > (for the level 0 is is reporting the epoch, > > "never", "none", or "No previous dump" would be better). Also noticing > > for the level 0 is is reporting "Level zero" instead of "Level 0". > > That's arguable. About the timestamp, the program just dumps the value > zero which gets printed as the epoch. The literal "zero" however is > result of an extra rule in libmagic's patterns. Personally, I'd either > have such an extra for either both cases or none at all. Any mix seems > weird.
Perhaps. I'm going by the way /I/ read things and *both* seem wrong due to different interpretation. For the "Level" field the value is a base 10 number unless the value is 0. If one was writing a script which identified dump files the Level field is excellent, except for having "zero" instead of "0". The "Previous dump" field won't ever display as 0. Displaying the epoch is valid, though suboptimal for humans and would need special handling for scripts. As this is a string, having "No previous dump" or omitting the field would likely cause a script to save an empty string for the value which seems likely to result in correct behavior. Of the two, having "Level 0" seems, by far, the more important issue since it screws up both humans and scripts. Let us not forget the original report was the values for "This dump" and "Previous dump" are interchanged. -- (\___(\___(\______ --=> 8-) EHM <=-- ______/)___/)___/) \BS ( | ehem+sig...@m5p.com PGP 87145445 | ) / \_CS\ | _____ -O #include <stddisclaimer.h> O- _____ | / _/ 8A19\___\_|_/58D2 7E3D DDF4 7BA6 <-PGP-> 41D1 B375 37D0 8714\_|_/___/5445
