On 07/04/2012 09:38 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
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
On 07/04/2012 11:48 PM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
Wouldn't it then be consequent to remove the long option --megabyte?
Yes, that does make sense.
Bernhard Voelker wrote:
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
Bernhard Voelker wrote:
On 07/04/2012 09:38 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
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
On 07/05/2012 02:35 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
However, I'm tempted to remove it directly this time, since it's been
undocumented for a while:
5 years in df.1 and df --help: COREUTILS-6_9-151-g1e07a21
11 years in coreutils.texi: FILEUTILS-4_1_4-28-gf5bf6fe
What do you think?
I agree,
According to The International Earth Rotation Service (IERS) we have
Leap Seconds included in our UTC time.
Please refer http://hpiers.obspm.fr/iers/bul/bulc/bulletinc.dat .
~ snip ~
A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of June 2012.
The sequence of dates of the UTC second
Hello,
can you please do me a favor and correct the typo in the title?
don't - doesn't
Thank you for the GNU system!
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Sincerely
i. A. Juergen Heine
juergen.he...@qvs-deutschland.de
QVS GmbH
Lange Laube 18
D-30159 Hannover
http://www.qvs-deutschland.de
Tel:
retitle 11866 date doesn't accept 61-sec. minutes
tag moreinfo
thanks
On 07/05/2012 02:15 AM, Juergen Heine wrote:
A positive leap second will be introduced at the end of June 2012.
The sequence of dates of the UTC second markers will be:
2012 June 30, 23h 59m 59s
2012 June 30, 23h 59m
On 05/07/12 18:39, Eric Blake wrote:
retitle 11866 date doesn't accept 61-sec. minutes
thank you for the correction.
The command 'date' doesn't have any control over whether your system is
configured to honor or ignore leap seconds. Some systems are
intentionally configured to ignore leap
On 07/05/2012 01:05 PM, Juergen Heine wrote:
If i'm correct, can we add this information to the manual for
people who don't understand the simple line leap seconds are
getting ignored?
Sure, I added the following and am marking this as done.
From bfda96e0ac5552bb1784f5e1dc311918ce077d50 Mon
10 matches
Mail list logo