[tz] zdump bug in Asia/Singapore
tim at timtimeonline.com
Mon Sep 29 14:32:57 UTC 2014
Sorry to be a pain, but your proposed fix at
still doesn't quite read right to me.
I think it's important, at least for -c, to clarify exactly what is
meant by "inclusive" and "exclusive". Proposed further patch attached.
On 11 Sep 2014 03:17, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Tim Parenti wrote:
>> Unfortunately, it seems your example doesn't match observed behavior.
> Right you are. Thanks for catching that. Since it doesn't really
> matter I'd rather leave the code alone, and fix the documentation to
> describe it, as that'd be less disruptive (and also easier to implement
> :-). Problem fixed in the first proposed patch attached.
-------------- next part --------------
From 5dee6bf7a299b09b57dca73b4d93eed4ad164a88 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tim Parenti <tim at timtimeonline.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 10:15:30 -0400
Subject: * zdump.8: Further clarify zdump cutoff behavior.
zdump.8 | 4 +++-
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/zdump.8 b/zdump.8
index be220fa..d9f9944 100644
@@ -55,7 +55,9 @@ implementations with different time representations.
Cut off verbose output at the given year(s).
Cutoff times are computed using the proleptic Gregorian calendar with year 0
and with Universal Time (UT) ignoring leap seconds.
-The lower bound is exclusive and the upper is inclusive; for example, a
+The lower bound is exclusive of 00:00:00 UT January 1 of the specified year
+and the upper is inclusive of 00:00:00 UT January 1 of the specified year;
+for example, a
of 1970 excludes a transition occurring at the very start of 1970 but a
More information about the tz