Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 11:21:04 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@freebsd.org>, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, svn-src-head <svn-src-head@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r345365 - head/bin/date Message-ID: <CANCZdfrGmt7jPqzgfg9fqvFu-DvuK%2BSRmnVPOgOiJ-oihv=jdQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <8cbcb45384bdf9af7f6ac0ba26121efa6a7b5669.camel@freebsd.org> References: <201903210647.x2L6lNb6045456@repo.freebsd.org> <8cbcb45384bdf9af7f6ac0ba26121efa6a7b5669.camel@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:24 AM Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2019-03-21 at 06:47 +0000, Warner Losh wrote: > > Author: imp > > Date: Thu Mar 21 06:47:23 2019 > > New Revision: 345365 > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/345365 > > > > Log: > > Remove -n flag, fix setting date / time > > > > IMO, the -n flag should still be accepted, but ignored, to provide > compatibility with anybody's old scripts or other automation that uses > date -n, since the new default behavior is exactly what the old -n flag > provided. > > On the other hand, the fact that date(1) has failed to set the date for > about 3 months shows that it isn't a heavily-used command. > I read this a few hours ago and thought "nope, well, maybe" and set it aside. I'm still ambivalent. I've never used -n when setting the date in my entire career. I didn't even know what it was when this bug was brought up. so on the one hand it's easy enough to ignore, on the other we have enough ignore for compatibility junk in the tree... Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfrGmt7jPqzgfg9fqvFu-DvuK%2BSRmnVPOgOiJ-oihv=jdQ>