Re: [PATCH]: Fix for several getdate.y issues

[Ondřej Vašík]

Jim Meyering wrote:
> Would you mind separating that into a few separate change sets?

No problem, I splitted the main patch into smaller sub-patches, it is
still not complete set of changes, following 3 gnulib getdate.y patches
are fixing only issue #2 and #3. 

> - in a function definition, the function name must begin in col 1
> - new pointer parameters must be const
> - adjust type of new, time-related parameters.  at least one should be time_t

Thanks for spotting time_t for seconds and function name not in col 1.
I'm not sure about the const for pointer params, as I have to modify 
this parser_control *pc (to extract infos from arguments and store them
or to pass information about wrong date format spotted). Or you meant
something else? Could you please clarify that? TIA.

> For coreutils, please add a NEWS entry for each bug fix.

I did summary for those three gnulib patches and added one test to the
date test. Hope that it's sufficient. Test will pass only if at least
getdate.y patches #1 and #3 are applied.

> I will have time next week to give this a more thorough review.

Thanks in advance, I hope I will do the rest of patches ( 1 or 2 more
are still necessary to cover all the issues I found).

Greetings,
         Ondrej

getdate_1_TZignored.patch
Description: Text Data

getdate_2_factorization.patch
Description: Text Data

getdate_3_TZinvalidchecks.patch
Description: Text Data

date_1_TZdayoffsettest.patch
Description: Text Data

signature.asc
Description: Toto je digitálně podepsaná část zprávy