From owner-freebsd-bugs  Wed Jul 10 19:00:03 1996
Return-Path: owner-bugs
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA05772
          for bugs-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jul 1996 19:00:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from gnats@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id TAA05744;
          Wed, 10 Jul 1996 19:00:01 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 19:00:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199607110200.TAA05744@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-bugs
Cc: 
From: "Stephen J. Roznowski" <sjr@zombie.ncsc.mil>
Subject: Re: misc/1380: Year 2000 breakage with tm_year
Reply-To: "Stephen J. Roznowski" <sjr@zombie.ncsc.mil>
Sender: owner-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

The following reply was made to PR misc/1380; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: "Stephen J. Roznowski" <sjr@zombie.ncsc.mil>
To: mpp@freefall.freebsd.org
Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: misc/1380: Year 2000 breakage with tm_year
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 21:50:52 -0400

 > From: Mike Pritchard <mpp@freefall.freebsd.org>
 > Subject: Re: misc/1380: Year 2000 breakage with tm_year
 > 
 > Stephen J. Roznowski wrote:
 > > >Description:
 > > 
 > > 	Several programs have a hardcoded 19 in responses for the year.
 > > 	This will break in 4 years...
 > > [...]
 > > --- 1467,1474 ----
 > > 				struct tm *gmtime();
 > > 				t = gmtime(&stbuf.st_mtime);
 > > 				reply(213,
 > > ! 					    "%04d%02d%02d%02d%02d%02d",
 > > ! 					    1900+t->tm_year, t->tm_mon+1, t->tm_mday,
 > 
 > Isn't there a TM_YEAR_BASE symbol defined somewhere that should
 > be used instead of a hardcoded 1900?
 
 When I submitted my original changes to NetBSD, I used that symbol;
 however, according to "J.T. Conklin <jtc@NetBSD.ORG>" the definition
 of the tm_year field is "years since 1900" according to Standard C.
 [and not years since TM_YEAR_BASE]
 
 -SR