From muir@idiom.com  Sun Jun  4 02:17:36 1995
Received: from idiom.com (idiom.com [140.174.82.4])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id CAA04982
          for <FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org>; Sun, 4 Jun 1995 02:17:32 -0700
Received: (from muir@localhost) by idiom.com (8.6.10/8.6.10) id CAA12107; Sun, 4 Jun 1995 02:17:28 -0700
Message-Id: <199506040917.CAA12107@idiom.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 1995 02:17:28 -0700
From: David Muir Sharnoff <muir@idiom.com>
Reply-To: muir@idiom.com
To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: at doesn't seem to accept the time formats it's supposed to
X-Send-Pr-Version: 3.2

>Number:         483
>Category:       bin
>Synopsis:       at doesn't seem to accept the time formats it's supposed to
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       low
>Responsible:    freebsd-bugs (FreeBSD bugs mailing list)
>State:          closed
>Quarter:
>Keywords:
>Date-Required:
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Sun Jun  4 02:20:02 1995
>Closed-Date:    Sat Jun 24 19:16:51 MET DST 1995
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     David Muir Sharnoff
>Release:        FreeBSD 2.0-RELEASE i386
>Organization:
Idiom Consulting
>Environment:

>Description:

	According to at(1), the following formats should be accepted:

		You can also specify the date on which the job will be run by giving
		a date in the form month-name day with an optional year, or giving
		a date of the form MMDDYY, MM/DD/YY or DD.MM.YY.

	However when I run at, I get the following:

		idiom:auction<312> /usr/bin/at 0200 06/03/95
		at: garbled time
		idiom:auction<313> /usr/bin/at 02:00 06/03/95
		at: garbled time
		idiom:auction<314> /usr/bin/at 06/03/95 02:00
		at: garbled time

	In fact, the only way I found to enter a date is MMDDYY.

>How-To-Repeat:

>Fix:
	
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed 
State-Changed-By: joerg 
State-Changed-When: Sat Jun 24 19:16:51 MET DST 1995 
State-Changed-Why:  

Version 1.3 of at/parsetime.c did already fix most of the complaints. 
The last point of the PR has been based on a misunderstanding: the 
date specification _must_ follow the time-of-day spec.  Version 1.2 of 
the man pages clarifies this. 
>Unformatted:



