I have negotiated a 3 day weekend for the holidays! Starting today. Ok, catching up...
On 12/30/2016 01:39 PM, enh wrote: > time_t on 32-bit Android is 32 bits. > > that particular value looks like a sign-extension of 0xAFBEADCE, which > is still some time in 2063. Or if it's signed, that's -1346458162 which would be... sometime in the 1930's? hmmm... "./date -D %s -d -1346458162" is failing under glibc, and failing _differently_ under musl. (Wheee.) /me goes down tangent rathole debugging why. (THIS is why I need to finish mkroot and get a toybox test environment set up that can test stuff requiring root access under qemu under a known root filesystem and kernel config. Is my code broken, or does strptime not parse negative numerical arguments for %s format?) (Answer: musl doesn't implement %s at all, and glibc doesn't allow the %s value it converts to be negative. And of course posix doesn't specify signed OR unsigned for time_t at http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/sys_types.h.html because actually providing enough detail to implement things would be _useful_.) > two patches attached. one avoids sign extension for all calls to > `out`, fixing %Z for systems with a signed 32-bit time_t. The 0001-Avoid* patch only has the first hunk, which defines two macros there are never used and renames a function but not its users. >> This seems suspiciously large and I'm wondering what the valid range for >> this value is. I think we all do at this point. Rob _______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
