Hi Tomi.
>> At login, FBB showed a date of 01.01.190 (yes, that's no typo!).
>> Although we were estonished we stopped further investigating this
>> problem since we didn't want to corrupt our mail database.
> Are you sure that it is 190 ? Not 100 ? The latter would be easy
> to explain with "struct tm". It has a member tm_year that is
> often mistakingly taken as representing the year and decade as a
> two digit number when it actually is years since 1900 (see man
> mktime). The fix would be to get two digits with (tm.tm_year %
> 100) or better the correct year with (tm.tm_year + 1900).
That 190 is almost certainly correct - I would imagine the relevant
code looks something like the following:
Q> printf( "%02u.%02u.19%u", tm_mday, tm_mon, tm_year % 100 );
Try it, and you'll see you get just that for a date of 1st Jan 2000,
and the fix would be to use the following instead:
Q> printf( "%02u.%02u.%u", tm_mday, tm_mon, tm_year + 1900 );
Best wishes from Riley.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| There is something frustrating about the quality and speed of Linux |
| development, ie., the quality is too high and the speed is too high, |
| in other words, I can implement this XXXX feature, but I bet someone |
| else has already done so and is just about to release their patch. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
* ftp://ftp.MemAlpha.cx/pub/rhw/Linux
* http://www.MemAlpha.cx/kernel.versions.html
