Hi Alan, Alan McNatty wrote:
> Hi Alex, > > How about this (see patch) - not sure if it's *nice* to use difftime but > it keeps it clean. yep, you patch will work, but... I just don't see a need to convert or calculate our localtime and tell it SMSC. Why not just force UTC time on SMSC (this does my patch)? (as said before, just imagine your localtime = UTC, then you will send the same value as with my patch. Ahh and for the paranoid people: we don't tell smsc in wich timezone we are ;)) > > Cheers, > Alan > > ps. will look at have a relative vs absolute patch if 3.3 or >=3.4, etc > > On Thu, 2004-11-18 at 03:23, Alexander Malysh wrote: >> Paul Keogh wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> >> Btw. I don't know, why we calculate local <-> utc diff and >> >> for what it should be good? Patch just set timestamps in utc... >> >> >> > >> > Hmm, but does'nt the 3.4 spec say that the time stamp includes local >> > time value in quarter hours offset +/- from UTC. (section 7.1.1) >> > >> > Your patch just sets the quarter hour offset to 0, so you effectively >> > ignore any local time offset ? Won't this confuse the SMSC ? >> >> with my patch, we just tell SMSC that our localtime is utc time... how >> should this confuse SMSC? (just imagine your localtime really equal to >> utc) >> >> > >> > But, this time stuff makes me confused :-) -- Thanks, Alex
