On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 11:24 -0800, Ian Wienand wrote:
Hi,
I notice that in the syslog-ng from my Debian install (2.0.9) log_msg_parse_date has
p = strptime(self->date.str, "%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S", &tm);
and in 3.1beta2 I see
p = (guchar *) strptime((gchar *) date, "%Y-%m-%d T%H:%M:%S", &tm);
Is the extra space intended?
I'm also wondering about a seeming ambiguity in RFC3339 [1]
In 5.6 it says
NOTE: ISO 8601 defines date and time separated by "T". Applications using this syntax may choose, for the sake of readability, to specify a full-date and full-time separated by (say) a space character.
However in Appendix A it says
ISO 8601 states that the "T" may be omitted under some circumstances. This grammar requires the "T" to avoid ambiguity.
So is the T required or not? Should syslog-ng be able to parse either format?
-i
That space got added because of portability reasons, AFAIR it was HP-Ux which didn't like %dT as a format string. In strftime a space is any number of white space characters, and can be none. And before parsing the date with strptime() syslog-ng checks certain characters in the input string to decide which strptime() format is to be used. And there the 'T' is required. if (left >= 19 && src[4] == '-' && src[7] == '-' && src[10] == 'T' && src[13] == ':' && src[16] == ':') { /* RFC3339 timestamp, expected format: YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS[.frac]<+/->ZZ:ZZ */ ... } If you look at the unit tests under tests/unit/test_msgparse.c you can see which format the code is tested against. Currently we don't support timestamps without the 'T' letter, but as the date recognition is based on heuristics that 'T' is quite important right now. This could be less important with the new RFC5424 protocol format, where the timestamp is required to be RFC3339. -- Bazsi