Re: Glibc 2.2.5 mktime() - differences between distributions
Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk> writes:
> On Sun, 2002-05-26 at 08:07, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
>> Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk> writes:
>>
>> > It seems that Red Hat's latest glibc has introduced a strict
>> > interpretation of the ISO C mktime() definition, such that dates before
>> > 1970 are now considered to be out of range. This has caused breakage of
>> > any application that relies on the old behaviour, such as PostgreSQL.
>>
>> Please get the facts right: The glibc CVS version has such a change in
>
> The facts are what I wanted to discover.
Sorry, that wasn't obvious to me.
>
>> it - and Red Hat used as their glibc a version that has this change
>> incorporated. The change will be in the next official glibc release
>> and has been discussed on the glibc lists,
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>> > It is also the case that neither Debian's nor Suse's glibc show this
>> > change; nor is it mentioned in their changelogs..
>> >
>> > Do you know why this change has occurred only in Red Hat's version? Are
>> > the distributions' version numbers out of sync?
>> >
>> > A small program for testing is attached. On Debian's latest libc6 it
>> > reports a timestamp of -31712400, but on latest Red Hat it apparently
>> > reports -1.
>
> I think you are saying that Red Hat's glibc 2.2.5-3x is not 2.2.5 but a
> cvs version beyond 2.2.5. Is that right?
Yes, that's right.
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger
SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
private aj@arthur.inka.de
http://www.suse.de/~aj
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: