Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 22:23:07 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@freebsd.org> Cc: Tim Kientzle <kientzle@freebsd.org>, "'current@FreeBSD.org'" <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RFC: Change mtree nsec handling? Message-ID: <20090130112307.GJ1755@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <4982CBC7.5050102@FreeBSD.org> References: <49829D49.10306@freebsd.org> <4982CBC7.5050102@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--eNMatiwYGLtwo1cJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2009-Jan-30 01:43:35 -0800, Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@freebsd.org> wrote: >Tim Kientzle wrote: >> For example, a timestamp of 1233295862.000001 >> (1233295682 seconds and 1000 nanoseconds) >> will be printed like this by mtree: >> time=3D1233295862.1000 >> Unsurprisingly, the mtree parsing works the same >> way in reverse. > >Given the age of mtree(8) I guess there are lot of existing mtree specs=20 >out there who rely on this behavior. The existing code to read nanoseconds will handle either the old format or a %09d format (the for() loop that Tim added is unnecessary) so existing specs won't have a problem. I think adding leading zeroes is the correct way to proceed. --=20 Peter Jeremy Please excuse any delays as the result of my ISP's inability to implement an MTA that is either RFC2821-compliant or matches their claimed behaviour. --eNMatiwYGLtwo1cJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkmC4xsACgkQ/opHv/APuIcABgCfTqyAKRapbqC3vxs+e+pkDEQN /Q8AoIbHHBx0qL5Cfo8saFjvRD464XVO =4WKO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --eNMatiwYGLtwo1cJ--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090130112307.GJ1755>