From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Apr 23 4:44:38 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from shemp.palomine.net (shemp.palomine.net [205.198.88.200]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 169EF14E9D for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 04:44:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cjohnson@palomine.net) Received: (qmail 19346 invoked by uid 1000); 23 Apr 1999 11:42:02 -0000 Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 07:42:02 -0400 From: Chris Johnson To: Ilya Varlashkin Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Year 2000 Message-ID: <19990423074202.A19312@palomine.net> References: <4.1.19990419154056.00b88920@mail-r> <199904231136.PAA44330@diamond.ripn.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i In-Reply-To: <199904231136.PAA44330@diamond.ripn.net>; from Ilya Varlashkin on Fri, Apr 23, 1999 at 03:35:59PM +0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Apr 23, 1999 at 03:35:59PM +0400, Ilya Varlashkin wrote: > According to Ludwig Pummer: > > At 02:20 PM 4/19/99 , Chad R. Larson wrote: > > >... But it did make me wonder if the FreeBSD organization, > > >or any of y'all out there have so done (and if so, what the outcome > > >was). I'd expect sore spots in the locale stuff, perhaps in process > > >accounting. > > > > http://www.freebsd.org/y2kbug.html > > > > Ok, just look: > > "After extensive analysis and testing, we believe that > FreeBSD is 100% Y2K compliant...." (from that page) > > But what about struct tm from /usr/include/time.h: > > int tm_year; /* years since 1900 */ > > So I suppose asctime(3), localtime(3) and gmtime(3) are not Y2K-compliant, > are they? Applications that blindly rely on Y2K-compliant OS will > operate wrong year value. Did I missed something? An int can hold integers bigger than 99. In the year 2003, for example, tm_year would be 103, which fits nicely into an int. Chris To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message