Thank you for the clarification, it's really a disappointing answer.
Perhaps the manual needs to be clearer about this limitation.
On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 4:53 PM Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
Show 62 quoted lines
>
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 11:23:24AM +0800, Dongsheng Song wrote:
>
> > I found a timezone related bug in the git:
> >
> > 1. git log 11990eba -1 --date=format:%s
> >
> > commit 11990eba0be50d1ad0655ede4062b7130326c41f (HEAD -> trunk,
> > origin/trunk, origin/HEAD)
> > Author: rillig <rillig@NetBSD.org>
> > Date: 1635604878
> >
> > indent: move debugging functions to a separate section
> >
> > 2. git cat-file -p 11990eba
> >
> > tree 5d62150f5e2bafd3db76641450ca5d902302a039
> > parent 892557a74bd49983fac28366b772b53c9216ca73
> > author rillig <rillig@NetBSD.org> 1635633678 +0000
> > committer rillig <rillig@NetBSD.org> 1635633678 +0000
> >
> > indent: move debugging functions to a separate section
> >
> > 3. conclusion
> >
> > The unix time stored in git repository not same as the git log output,
> > then there must be a timezone offset bug:
> >
> > 1635633678 - 1635604878 = 28800 = 8 hours (local timezone offset)
>
> The short answer is: don't do that. Use --date=unix instead.
>
> The longer one is:
>
> The problem is that the strftime() "%s" specifier is a bit broken.
> That function (which is what is interpreting your format) takes a
> broken-down "struct tm", which can only be converted back to an epoch
> time if you know which time zone it's in.
>
> But we have no way to tell the function that; the standard indicates
> that it always assumes the local system timezone, and there's no
> provision at all for formatting times in other zones (which is what we
> usually try to do, showing the date in the author's zone). There's no
> field in the "struct tm" to carry any zone information[1].
>
> Even when you're in the same timezone, there's a similar problem with
> the is_dst field. There's some discussion in [2], including the
> possibility of intercepting "%s" and handling it ourselves, like we do
> for "%z". I don't think anybody has cared enough to work on it.
>
> -Peff
>
> [1] Some implementations (like glibc) actually _do_ carry this
> information in private fields of "struct tm". But we can't rely on
> it, and even where it's available, it's confusing (e.g., mktime()
> ignores it!). If you're a real masochist, you can read all of:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/git/22824.29946.305300.380299@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de/
>
> [2] This is a similar bug report from 2020:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAGqZTUu2U6FFXGTXihC64O0gB5Bz_Z3MbD750kMoJWMciAGH6w@mail.gmail.com/