From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 4 05:56:59 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86DD937B401; Sun, 4 May 2003 05:56:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thalia.otenet.gr (mailsrv.otenet.gr [195.170.0.5]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26B0C43FB1; Sun, 4 May 2003 05:56:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Received: from gothmog.gr (patr530-a073.otenet.gr [212.205.215.73]) by thalia.otenet.gr (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h44CusmX018034; Sun, 4 May 2003 15:56:55 +0300 (EEST) Received: from gothmog.gr (gothmog [127.0.0.1]) by gothmog.gr (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h44Cus0X001573; Sun, 4 May 2003 15:56:54 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Received: (from giorgos@localhost) by gothmog.gr (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h44Cus6q001572; Sun, 4 May 2003 15:56:54 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 15:56:54 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <20030504125654.GC699@gothmog.gr> References: <200305031639.h43GdYQ4049867@repoman.freebsd.org> <20030503205500.GB3907@gothmog.gr> <20030503210442.GC3907@gothmog.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/bin/ls extern.h ls.c print.c util.c src/bin/pax ar_io.c ar_subs.c cache.c cpio.c extern.h gen_subs.c getoldopt.c options.c pat_rep.c pax.c pax.h src/bin/ps fmt.c src/bin/rcp rcp.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 May 2003 12:57:00 -0000 On 2003-05-04 00:29, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Giorgos Keramidas writes: > > - (void)strftime(buf, sizeof(buf), "%e%b%y", tp); > > + (void)strftime(buf, sizeof(buf), "%e%b%Y", tp); > > [...] > Anyway, the point is that in this case the warning is wrong. The code > is not Y2K safe but it can't be made Y2K safe without breaking the > formatting - and it doesn't even need to be Y2K safe in the first > place since the date displayed is known to lie between boottime and > timeofday so you'd have to have a 100-year uptime for it to become a > problem. Ah, thanks :) Then I should look at WARNS and why it doesn't include -Wno-format-y2k in the case of WARNS=1.