From owner-cvs-all Sat Jan 16 02:48:37 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA00161 for cvs-all-outgoing; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 02:48:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from helium.clari.net.au (helium.clari.net.au [203.8.14.114]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA00156 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 02:48:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from danny@hilink.com.au) Received: from localhost (danny@localhost) by helium.clari.net.au (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA18955; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 21:48:16 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from danny@hilink.com.au) X-Authentication-Warning: helium.clari.net.au: danny owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 21:48:16 +1100 (EST) From: "Daniel O'Callaghan" X-Sender: danny@helium.clari.net.au To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" cc: committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Y2K compliance question In-Reply-To: <99092.916474783@zippy.cdrom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk On Sat, 16 Jan 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > Right now, FreeBSD-current is *NOT* y2k compliant. I know that there > > *are* bugs remaining. > > It would help vastly if you could be more specific. Saying, for > example, that you found "problems" or that there were "beasties" > lurking aren't technically detailed enough to be useful. I've been looking for, discovering and fixing y2k problems for a week. I was just trying to say that I have not finished looking and I expect to find more. Hence, statements that FreeBSD is compliant are, IMHO, not really true. At the time I wrote the above, I had some things in my "to do" list. Perhaps I should have said, "there are bugs remaining in cvs and bind and probably elsewhere". Danny To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message