|
From: | GNU bug Tracking System |
Subject: | bug#50694: closed (ls and cpio's idea of "six months ago" are slightly different) |
Date: | Mon, 07 Feb 2022 02:54:02 +0000 |
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2022 18:53:34 -0800 with message-id <02556449-8595-c669-7d6d-1c510d0899b6@cs.ucla.edu> and subject line Re: bug#50694: ls and cpio's idea of "six months ago" are slightly different has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #50694, regarding ls and cpio's idea of "six months ago" are slightly different to be marked as done. (If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact help-debbugs@gnu.org.) -- 50694: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=50694 GNU Bug Tracking System Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---Subject: ls and cpio's idea of "six months ago" are slightly different Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 13:06:36 +0800 What a headache. "Six months ago" means slightly different things to cpio and ls. And ls documents do say exactly what, and cpio documents don't even say six months. $ cat prover set -eu cd /tmp for i in `seq 170 190` do touch -d "$i days ago" x { env - ls -l x|tr -s ' ' ls x|cpio -o 2>&-|cpio -tv 2>&-|tr -s ' ' } > z if test `sort -u z|wc -l` != 1 then cat z; echo fi done $ sh prover -rw-r--r-- 1 jidanni jidanni 0 Mar 23 12:47 x -rw-r--r-- 1 jidanni jidanni 0 Mar 23 2021 x -rw-r--r-- 1 jidanni jidanni 0 Mar 22 12:47 x -rw-r--r-- 1 jidanni jidanni 0 Mar 22 2021 x So two things that should look the same ... don't. What's worse is there is no option to change cpio's date format. Well then just change ls's date format to match cpio's right? Well yes, but then there is no way to change ls's idea of six months, even if we examined cpio's source code to find out what it uses. $ ls --version ls (GNU coreutils) 8.32 Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc. $ cpio --version cpio (GNU cpio) 2.13 Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---Subject: Re: bug#50694: ls and cpio's idea of "six months ago" are slightly different Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2022 18:53:34 -0800 User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 On 9/19/21 22:06 in <https://bugs.gnu.org/50694>, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote:What a headache. "Six months ago" means slightly different things to cpio and ls. And ls documents do say exactly what, and cpio documents don't even say six months.Thanks for the bug report. Since the behavior is documented for ls but not cpio and lots more people use ls, let's change cpio to behave like ls. Proposed patches to cpio attached. The last patch does the actual change; the earlier ones are issues I noticed on the way.(Sergey, I don't have commit privileges for cpio on Savannah. If you give me privileges I can install these patches; otherwise, please take a look and install if you like. Thanks.)In the meantime I'll close the coreutils bug report, as I don't think we need to change GNU 'ls'.0001-Remove-trailing-white-space-and-empty-lines.patch
Description: Text Data0002-build-update-submodules-to-latest.patch
Description: Text Data0003-Fix-integer-overflows-in-timestamp-output.patch
Description: Text Data0004-Use-GNU-ls-algorithm-for-deciding-timestamp-format.patch
Description: Text Data
--- End Message ---
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |