Bug#179139: marked as done (libc6: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31)
Your message dated Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:00:08 -0800
with message-id <[🔎] 20030131040007.GA4839@nisa.net>
and subject line Bug#179139: libc6: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Jan 2003 02:59:56 +0000
>From stan@schedar.com Thu Jan 30 20:59:55 2003
Return-path: <stan@schedar.com>
Received: from 209-6-167-4.c3-0.arl-ubr1.sbo-arl.ma.cable.rcn.com (schedar.com) [209.6.167.4]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 18eRPH-0001st-00; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:59:55 -0600
Received: from stan by schedar.com with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 18eRPG-0006j4-00; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 21:59:54 -0500
From: Stan Heckman <stan@schedar.com>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: libc6: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 21:59:54 -0500
Message-Id: <[🔎] E18eRPG-0006j4-00@schedar.com>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0
tests=SPAM_PHRASE_00_01
version=2.41
X-Spam-Level:
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.1-10
Severity: normal
$ date --version | head -3; date -d 1969-12-31
date (coreutils) 4.5.2
Written by David MacKenzie.
date: invalid date `1969-12-31'
I expected output something like like "Wed Dec 31 00:00:00 EST 1969", not "invalid date".
All dates before 1970-01-01 that I have tried seem to produce "invalid date"; all dates after
1970-01-01 that I have tried produce the output I expect.
There is some discussion of this bug on the lists debian-user@lists.debian.org and
kplug-list@kernel-panic.org near the end of January, 2003.
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux pipkin 2.4.18 #1 Fri Aug 16 15:40:44 EDT 2002 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Versions of packages libc6 depends on:
ii libdb1-compat 2.1.3-7 The Berkeley database routines [gl
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 179139-close) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Jan 2003 04:00:11 +0000
>From jbailey@delta.nisa.net Thu Jan 30 22:00:10 2003
Return-path: <jbailey@delta.nisa.net>
Received: from delta.nisa.net [207.194.212.31]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 18eSLa-0003vb-00; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 22:00:10 -0600
Received: from delta.nisa.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by delta.nisa.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian -4) with ESMTP id h0V408rQ005158
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=FAIL);
Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:00:09 -0800
Received: (from jbailey@localhost)
by delta.nisa.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian -4) id h0V408H6005156;
Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:00:08 -0800
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:00:08 -0800
From: Jeff Bailey <jbailey@nisa.net>
To: Stan Heckman <stan@schedar.com>, 179139@bugs.debian.org
Cc: 179139-close@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#179139: libc6: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31
Message-ID: <[🔎] 20030131040007.GA4839@nisa.net>
References: <[🔎] E18eRPG-0006j4-00@schedar.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] E18eRPG-0006j4-00@schedar.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
Delivered-To: 179139-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-14.1 required=5.0
tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,
SPAM_PHRASE_05_08,USER_AGENT,USER_AGENT_MUTT
version=2.41
X-Spam-Level:
On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 09:59:54PM -0500, Stan Heckman wrote:
> $ date --version | head -3; date -d 1969-12-31
> date (coreutils) 4.5.2
> Written by David MacKenzie.
> date: invalid date `1969-12-31'
> I expected output something like like "Wed Dec 31 00:00:00 EST 1969",
> not "invalid date".
> All dates before 1970-01-01 that I have tried seem to produce "invalid
> date"; all dates after 1970-01-01 that I have tried produce the output
> I expect.
I suspect that you'll find that all dates before 1970 fail and that all
dates after Mon Jan 19 04:14:07 2038 (GMT) also fail.
Why are you reporting this as a bug against glibc? That's how time_t
works. Search google for "time_t" and "epoch" for more information.
Closing this bug.
Tks,
Jeff Bailey
Reply to: