At the time when I updated the code, it worked fine for my purposes, only differed significantly in: 1) parse failures for spam which often don't have legal (or legible) headers 2) Date: lines which did not include the timezone. I think previously it defaulted to assuming the local time zone, which I though was bogus. Now it defaults to UTC, which is arguably also bogus, but I think less so.
Of course, I may be significantly misremembering. Another problem with the dtimep.c from 1.0.4 is that it doesn't compile. In order to build it, you need to run it through a sed script. End-users shouldn't necessarily need to regenerate the c file from the lex file, so it was an awkward situation. The new sbr/dtimep.c actually compiles on most platforms. Shantonu On Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Ken Hornstein wrote: > >If I remember correctly, wasn't there still some problems remaining with > >the the code in CVS? I thought I remember some problems with date > >processing. > > IMHO, the only problem was with Dan's perception of the date processing. > I thought the changes were fine. > > >If so, I would suggest rolling back those changes, if necessary. Then we > >should release a snapshot to a wider audience (since it has been a long > >time since the last release). That would at least get things rolling. > > Well, "go ahead". > > --Ken > >
