bug-coreutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#8782: date command


From: Jesse Gordon
Subject: bug#8782: date command
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 16:39:30 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10



On 6/1/2011 4:12 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 01/06/11 18:11, Rick Stanley wrote:
The date command is very useful.  A lot of features and options which I
take advantage of as I need them.  Every once in a while I need to use
the command to convert a UNIX Epoch Date to a normal date, so I attempt
to use the command as:

date -d 1306947372

Which results in the error message, "date: invalid date `1306947372'".

Neither 'date --help' or 'man date' shows that the command should have
been written as:

date -d @1306947372

I needed to do a Google search to see what I was doing wrong. (My memory
is not as good as it used to be!) ;^)

I don't know why this ('@') is needed, since the date command recognizes
many different date formats without specifying the format. For
completeness of the help and man page, please add a line explaining that
when passing a UNIX Epoch Date to the -d option, you need to prefix the
date with a '@'.

Thank you for your time and consideration!
You need the '@' to disambiguate. Consider fir example:

  date --date=1243
  date address@hidden

Unfortunately the date input formats are many and varied,
and I don't think it's worth getting specific in the man page.
The man page currently says:

"The date string format is more complex than is easily documented
here but is fully described in the info documentation."

So I'll close this as adequately documented.

thanks,
Pádraig.

Jumpin' whale gills! I wish I'd known about the -d @ function! I ended up writing my own in Perl utility just to convert epochs to dates.

I'm with Rick on this one. Date supports so many different date formats without any special arbitrary characters designating the format. The average sys admin just assumes the most simple date format in the world would also work the same way.

Since -d @1234 is so useful, and since it uncharacteristically requires an arbitrary prefix code, I think that it would be a very good to put it in all forms of documentation, even where the dozens of other obvious uses are not documented.

Thanks & have a great day,

Jesse Gordon






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]