[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] posixtm: don't reject a time with "60" as the number of seco
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] posixtm: don't reject a time with "60" as the number of seconds |
Date: |
Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:04:16 +0200 |
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Going backwards from "cal 1 1" you can see that in
>>> the Julian calendar 01-Jan-0000 was a Thursday, but that's not so
>>> relevant.
>>>
>>> However cal can help seeing that 01-Jan-0000 is a Saturday in
>>> Gregorian proleptic calendar (i.e. extending Gregorian calendar before
>>> the day when it was adopted). 400 years have 146097 days, which is
>>> divisible by 7, and 01-Jan-2000 was a Saturday.
>>
>> If that's true, then this new test failure suggests there's a bug in mktime.
>
> For the record, GNU Smalltalk gives the same answer.
Good. So does erlang.
In converting that to a proper gnulib-style test,
I realized that I'd interpreted reversed diffs.
This (actual output) is right:
-62167219200 Sat
and the expected output in posixtm.c was wrong.
- [PATCH] posixtm: don't reject a time with "60" as the number of seconds, Jim Meyering, 2009/09/14
- Re: [PATCH] posixtm: don't reject a time with "60" as the number of seconds, Paolo Bonzini, 2009/09/14
- Re: [PATCH] posixtm: don't reject a time with "60" as the number of seconds, Jim Meyering, 2009/09/15
- Re: [PATCH] posixtm: don't reject a time with "60" as the number of seconds, Paolo Bonzini, 2009/09/16
- Re: [PATCH] posixtm: don't reject a time with "60" as the number of seconds, Jim Meyering, 2009/09/16
- Re: [PATCH] posixtm: don't reject a time with "60" as the number of seconds, Jim Meyering, 2009/09/19
- Re: [PATCH] posixtm: don't reject a time with "60" as the number of seconds, Eric Blake, 2009/09/19
- Re: [PATCH] posixtm: don't reject a time with "60" as the number of seconds, Jim Meyering, 2009/09/19