After pulling to the lastest revision (v8.17-37-g74427c7) and
a successful build (make -j), a subsequent make syntax-check -j
failed:
...
8.47 vulnerable_makefile_CVE-2009-4029
8.78 copyright_check
CC hostname.o
CCLD arch
CCLD arch
CC hostname.o
CC
peter evans wrote:
Thank you for closing this as not a bug.
So it is not a bug that date is unable to parse its own output in
arbitrary locales.
Indeed, it would not be a bug if it stopped and complained about
it. That would be
perfectly acceptable.
date however, goes one better than
Jim Meyering wrote:
+static inline unsigned char to_uchar (char ch) { return ch; }
For the use of 'inline', one needs this too:
--- m4/parse-datetime.m4.orig Wed Jul 4 10:04:43 2012
+++ m4/parse-datetime.m4Wed Jul 4 10:04:36 2012
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# parse-datetime.m4 serial 19
+#
Bruno Haible wrote:
Jim Meyering wrote:
+static inline unsigned char to_uchar (char ch) { return ch; }
For the use of 'inline', one needs this too:
+++ m4/parse-datetime.m4 Wed Jul 4 10:04:36 2012
+ AC_REQUIRE([AC_C_INLINE])
Thanks, Bruno.
Here's the complete patch on the gnulib
Jim Meyering wrote:
Bruno Haible wrote:
Jim Meyering wrote:
+static inline unsigned char to_uchar (char ch) { return ch; }
For the use of 'inline', one needs this too:
+++ m4/parse-datetime.m4 Wed Jul 4 10:04:36 2012
+ AC_REQUIRE([AC_C_INLINE])
Thanks, Bruno.
Here's the complete
df -k and df -m both work but only df -k is mentioned as part of df --
help. So, the omission to document -m is IMO a bug.
A second issue:
Since df supports -k and -m, shouldn't if support -g (as synoym for --
block-size=1M as well?
Btw. df --version outputs:
df (GNU coreutils) 8.16
Andreas
--
Hi GNU-Team,
While going through the command for “Copying File” in Unix and executing the
same, I found one good enhancement for the command : $ cp -i file-name
target-folder or target-path.
Bug Report :-
Type : Enhancement
Description : Final status needs to be displayed for the specified
On 07/04/2012 01:11 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
df -k and df -m both work but only df -k is mentioned as part of df --
help. So, the omission to document -m is IMO a bug.
I think the general idea is that -k was a mistake, but
it's standardized, and that we don't want to have
options -m, -g, -t,
tag 11859 notabug
thanks
On 07/04/2012 02:16 AM, Sitam Jana wrote:
Actual result : Final status for the copy not displayed.
Expected result : As the command is an interactive command, it should display
a final status message in the terminal to the user whether the file is
actually
