From owner-freebsd-current Tue Apr 2 11:21:34 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id LAA17788 for current-outgoing; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 11:21:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de [141.76.1.11]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA17724 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 11:21:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from sax.sax.de by irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with ESMTP id VAA21192 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 21:20:51 +0200 Received: by sax.sax.de (8.6.11/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id VAA02320 for freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 21:20:50 +0200 Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.7.4/8.6.9) id TAA10217 for freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 19:55:57 +0200 (MET DST) From: J Wunsch Message-Id: <199604021755.TAA10217@uriah.heep.sax.de> Subject: Re: adjkerntz (was: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/tzsetup ...) To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org (FreeBSD-current users) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 19:55:56 +0200 (MET DST) In-Reply-To: <199604012024.AAA01620@astral.msk.su> from "=?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?=" at Apr 2, 96 00:24:20 am X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME8a] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk As =?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?= wrote: (Applicability of adjkerntz) > Of course, pure Unix machine don't need it. But if you sometimes > mount DOS floppies (msdosfs), you need it. msdosfs? MSDOS' idea of a timezone is broken by design (i.e., it doesn't have an idea about it at all). Someone in Australia could send a file with a DOS timestamp to somebody in California across the Internet, and the recipient will see a file that appears to be written ``in the future''. I don't see how adjkerntz should fix it. Since DOS files don't have an explicit timezone, you can imply any time zone you want, so applying the kernel's idea (UTC) seems to be most logical. (Note that this might conflict with the idea of your local DOS, but applying the localtime does as well conflict with the idea of any other DOS not running in *your* localtime zone.) To be honest, even in cases where i run DOS every now and then, i simply don't care for its broken idea of a timezone. I live with it running in UTC then. (brokeness of adjkerntz for the last DST switchover in the EU) > > It was with a -current version, and -current timezone settings. So it > > seems that new versions do also have bugs. ;) > > I need more info on this subject, i.e. some test results, > DST rules and what finally happens. DST rules: MET How to reproduce: setup localtime as MET, and tweak your clock to run from Mar 31, 1996, 01:58 MET onwards. Watch the syslog at 02:00 MET (where the switch happened to 03:00 MET DST). I think Holm Tiffe was willing to send you all information he's got. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)