[hackers] [sbase][PATCH] Add strptime, which replaces date-parsing in date(1)

2024-03-02 Thread Elie Le Vaillant
usage: strptime timestamp fmt Most other userspace implementations allow in date(1) the parsing of dates. That way, one can use a date string, and manipulate it in scripts. However, the current date(1) implementation only accepts Unix epochs to describe date and time. Rather than patching date(1

[hackers] [sbase][PATCH] Add implementation of tac(1)

2024-03-02 Thread Elie Le Vaillant
--- .gitignore | 1 + Makefile | 1 + README | 1 + libutil/getlines.c | 3 +- tac.1 | 22 +++ tac.c | 68 ++ text.h | 3 +- 7 files changed, 97 insertions(+), 2 deletio

[hackers] [sbase][PATCH] Add implementation of shuf(1)

2024-03-02 Thread Elie Le Vaillant
--- .gitignore | 1 + Makefile | 2 ++ README | 1 + libutil/random.c | 46 + shuf.1 | 43 +++ shuf.c | 77 util.h | 3 ++ 7 files changed,

[hackers] [sbase] Orphan patches and unsent patches

2024-03-02 Thread Elie Le Vaillant
Hello, Some patches I've sent are orphaned in the mailing list. These are: > strptime: tm should be initialized as the current time and > shuf: use libutil/random functions instead of custom ones Moreover, some patches I believed to have sent, weren't actually sent, due to bugs of my mail client.

[hackers] Re: [sbase] Orphan patches and unsent patches

2024-03-02 Thread Elie Le Vaillant
Elie Le Vaillant wrote: > cron(1) depends on the shuf(1) patch for libutil/random. This was > not made a standalone patch, which was a mistake on my part. Actually, libutil/random _was_ made a standalone patch, but it appears not to have been sent either. Also I'm not sure whether or not the pa

Re: [hackers] Re: [sbase] Orphan patches and unsent patches

2024-03-02 Thread NRK
On Sun, Mar 03, 2024 at 12:58:20AM +0100, Elie Le Vaillant wrote: > I'm using the web interface to the mailing list to check what has been > sent, and these patches were not sent. The web archive is not reliable and often drops mails. > + * Copied off OpenBSD (original is arc4random_uniform) > +