Re: pr -D FORMAT fixes, to match date +FORMAT

2005-03-20 Thread Paul Eggert
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've made this additional change so pr builds once again. Thanks. I had forgotten to check src/Makefile.am in. Sorry about that. ___ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org

Re: pr -D FORMAT fixes, to match date +FORMAT

2005-03-20 Thread Jim Meyering
Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... if (tm == NULL) { - buf = xmalloc (INT_BUFSIZE_BOUND (long int)); - sprintf (buf, %ld, (long int) st.st_mtime); + buf = xmalloc (INT_BUFSIZE_BOUND (long int) + + MAX (10, INT_BUFSIZE_BOUND (int))); +

Re: pr -D FORMAT fixes, to match date +FORMAT

2005-03-20 Thread Paul Eggert
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: - sprintf (buf, %ld.9d, (long int) s, ns); + sprintf (buf, %ld.%09d, (long int) s, ns); Ouch. Thanks for catching this. do you know how to create a file with e.g. 64-bit st_mtime touch -d @9223372036854775807 /tmp/foo should do it. I just

pr -D FORMAT fixes, to match date +FORMAT

2005-03-18 Thread Paul Eggert
The command pr -D FORMAT is documented to use the same format strings that date +FORMAT does, but this isn't currently true because the former uses strftime and the latter uses nstrftime. For example, pr -D%N doesn't work. I installed this patch to fix things. This also has the effect of