On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 08:29:11PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Changes since v3:
> >
> > - fixed the fix in archive-zip.c that tried to report a too large
> > timestamp (and would have reported the uninitialized time_t instead)
> >
> > - adjusted the so-far forgotten each_reflog() function (that was
> > introduced after v1, in 80f2a6097c4 (t/helper: add test-ref-store to
> > test ref-store functions, 2017-03-26)) to use timestamp_t and PRItime,
> > too
> >
> > - removed the date_overflows() check from time_to_tm(), as it calls
> > gm_time_t() which already performs that check
> >
> > - the date_overflows() check in show_ident_date() was removed, as we do
> > not know at that point yet whether we use the system functions to
> > render the date or not (and there would not be a problem in the latter
> > case)
>
> Assuming that the list consensus is to go with a separate
> timestamp_t (for that added Cc for those whose comments I saw in an
> earlier round), the patches looked mostly good (I didn't read with
> fine toothed comb the largest one 6/8 to see if there were
> inadvertent or missed conversions from ulong to timestamp_t,
> though), modulo a few minor "huh?" comments I sent separately.
>
> Will queue; thanks.
Sorry, I haven't read the series carefully yet (but from a skim I'm
happy with the overall direction). It does seem to cause failures in
t4212, though. For example:
expecting success:
commit=$(munge_author_date HEAD 18446744073709551617) &&
echo "Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 +0000" >expect &&
git log -1 --format=%ad $commit >actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
fatal: Timestamp too large for this system: 18446744073709551615
not ok 7 - date parser recognizes integer overflow
We used to convert overflows into a sentinel time, but now we die. I
originally chose the sentinel approach because it lets you use the tools
to examine and recover from the broken state. I could be convinced that
dying is better, but clearly we'd need to at least update the tests.
-Peff