This is the mail archive of the cygwin-patches mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Aug 29 11:56, Brian Inglis wrote: > On 2017-08-29 01:35, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Aug 25 11:47, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >> On Aug 24 11:11, Brian Inglis wrote: > >>> On 2017-08-24 03:40, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >>>> On Aug 24 11:32, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >>>>> On Aug 23 13:25, Brian Inglis wrote: > >>>>>> Cygwin strptime(3) (also strptime(1)) fails with default width, without an > >>>>>> explicit width, because of the test in the following code: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> case 'F': /* The date as "%Y-%m-%d". */ > >>>>>> { > >>>>>> LEGAL_ALT(0); > >>>>>> ymd |= SET_YMD; > >>>>>> char *tmp = __strptime ((const char *) bp, "%Y-%m-%d", > >>>>>> tm, era_info, alt_digits, > >>>>>> locale); > >>>>>> if (tmp && (uint) (tmp - (char *) bp) > width) > >>>>>> return NULL; > >>>>>> bp = (const unsigned char *) tmp; > >>>>>> continue; > >>>>>> } > >>>>>> > >>>>>> as default width is zero so test fails and returns NULL. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Simple patch for this as with the other cases supporting width is to change the > >>>>>> test to: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> if (tmp && width && (uint) (tmp - (char *) bp) > width) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> but this does not properly support [+0] flags or width in the format as > >>>>>> specified by glibc (latest POSIX punts on %F) for compatibility with strftime(), > >>>>>> affecting only the %Y format, supplying %[+0]<w-6>F, to support signed and zero > >>>>>> filled fixed and variable length year fields in %F format. > >>>> Btw., FreeBSD's _strptime only calls _strptime recursively, without any > >>>> checks for field width: > >>> As did Cygwin, which just did a goto recurse, before it was changed to support > >>> explicit width. Your call and option to go back and ignore it, patch bug, or > >>> forward and support flags and width based on strftime documentation. > >> > >> Well, I guess it depends on how much time you're willing to invest here. > >> If you're inclined to fix this per POSIX, you're welcome, of course. > > > > [...] > > Would it make sense, perhaps, if you just send the quick fix > > so we can get 2.9.0 out? > Attached - got diverted during strptime testing due to time functions gmtime, > localtime, mktime, strftime not properly handling struct tm->tm_year == INT_MAX > => year == INT_MAX + 1900 so year needs to be at least long in Cygwin 64, also > affecting tzcalc_limits, and depending on what is required to properly handle > time_t in Cygwin 32. Sounds like you're busy with time functions for a while ;) > From 19a3c20c705a576fee0f0e71a31f0c3ac553e612 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@SystematicSW.ab.ca> > Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 11:25:43 -0600 > Subject: [PATCH] winsup/cygwin/libc/strptime.cc(__strptime) fix %F width > > --- > winsup/cygwin/libc/strptime.cc | 6 ++++-- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Pushed. Thanks, Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |