trn date-handling bugfix
There has been some discussion in various quarters as to whether the
date-handling bugfix that was distributed when the problem first
appeared in early January and which I applied to Debian's trn is
correct.
See below a message from Wayne Davison, where he says that that patch
is correct. This is the patch that's in the latest Debian trn,
available in the stable as well as the development tree.
Ian.
>Newsgroups: news.software.readers,news.admin.misc,news.software.nntp
>From: wayne@clarinet.com (Wayne Davison)
>Subject: Re: trn-3.4.1 keeps asking about new groups!
>Organization: ClariNet Communications Corp.
>Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 20:36:08 GMT
>Message-ID: <DKzFwA.MAo@clarinet.com>
>References: <DKnuzI.FsG@yc.estec.esa.nl> <4cgtn4$npm@sidhe.hsc-sec.fr> <4clqq6$j5c@newsflash.concordia.ca> <4cne3v$8hl@zippy.cais.net>
>
>I can see nothing wrong with the already-posted fix that changes the 1968
>to 1969 since the code already handles February being 29 days long in a
>leap year. Here's the patch as a unified diff:
>
>Index: nntp.c
>@@ -320,5 +320,5 @@
> day += maxdays[month];
>
>- ss = ((((year-1970) * 365 + (year-1968)/4 + day - 1) * 24L + hh) * 60
>+ ss = ((((year-1970) * 365 + (year-1969)/4 + day - 1) * 24L + hh) * 60
> + mm) * 60 + ss;
>
>
>The comment about A.D. 2400 will also eventually be changed to be A.D. 2100,
>but this has no affect on the code. :-)
>
>...wayne..
Reply to: