On 6 January 2014 13:08, Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 12:55:08PM +0000, Sami Kerola wrote:
>> Year was left signed because someone said it might be interesting to
>> know pre-year-zero outputs. After a bit research the pre-zero year
>> calendars are theoretical construct, mostly because agreement in
>
> but the code is:
>
> #define SMALLEST_YEAR 1
>
> if (ctl.req.year < SMALLEST_YEAR)
> errx(EXIT_FAILURE, _("illegal year value: use positive integer"));
Hi Karel,
That is correct right now. If negative years are allowed to be used
I'm sure bug reports will follow. The leap year printouts are
obviously wrong.
>> Meanwhile the big year test is clearly broken. I recon there should be
>> a version for various sizes of INT_MAX tests, and depending how large
>> values are supported by system corresponding tests are ran.
>
> INT_MAX is the same everywhere, all you need is to remove arch
> specific "long" from the code and use strtos32_or_err() to parse the
> year number.
>
> (Well, I guess that 2147483647 years is enough :-)
Use of 32 bit int is indeed the easiest fix, and I'm all in favor of
cutting the cal output there.
--
Sami Kerola
http://www.iki.fi/kerolasa/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
