You are right Sharon there is no readme, but in the zip file downloaded from
the Sybase site, there is a file pfcy2k.txt and it lists the changes. I have
included the document for your info. Forgive me for the large posting
*************** FILE START
PowerBuilder Foundation Class (PFC) Y2K 5.0.04\6.5.1 Fixes
==========================================================
The Y2K patches are delivered as a complete set of PFC libraries (including
extensions). If you are already using PFC you should replace only your main
PFC libraries and not your extension libraries.
For example:
Version 5.0.04:
Replace pfcapsrv.pbl, pfcdwsrv.pbl, pfcmain.pbl, pfcwnsrv.pbl
Version 6.5.1:
Replace pfcapsrv.pbl, pfcdwsrv.pbl, pfcmain.pbl, pfcwnsrv.pbl, pfcutil.pbl
If an attempt to fix these Y2K issues has been made by overriding these PFC
functions in your own customized extension layer, first compare the official
fixes with your own changes. Remove the overriding functions in your
customized extension layer only if they address the fixes included in this
set of Y2K patches.
For example: a Y2K issue is addressed by modifiying n_cst_datetime and
overriding the function of_lastdayofmonth. After the patches are applied,
pfc_n_cst_datetime::of_lastdayofmonth now includes these changes, therefore
of_lastdayofmonth in n_cst_datetime should be removed from your customized
extension layer.
After applying the Y2K patches, it is advised to perform a Full Rebuild of
the application.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Object: pfc_n_cst_datetime DateTime Service
CR169790
Method: of_lastdayofmonth
Fix: Removed a loop which relied on an invalid date.
Added an array containing the number of days in each month.
Fix Release: 7.0GA, 6.5.1(y2kpatch), 5.0.04(y2kpatch)
CR162134
Method: of_relativemonth
Fix: Removed a loop which determined the last day in month.
The loop was relying on the of_IsValid(date) function to find an invalid
date. In PB 5.0.03+ a date variable can only contain a Null or a valid
date.
Fix Release: 7.0GA, 6.5.1(y2kpatch), 5.0.04(y2kpatch)
CR188246
Method: of_relativeyear
Fix: Removed a loop which determined the last day in month.
The loop was relying on the of_IsValid(date) function to find an invalid
date. In PB 5.0.03+ a date variable can only contain a Null or a valid
date.
Fix Release: 7.0GA, 6.5.1(y2kpatch), 5.0.04(y2kpatch)
=========================================================
Object: pfc_u_calendar Drop Down Calendar
CRs 162134 and 184373
Method: of_drawmonth
Fix: Did not redraw date of 1/1/1900. Removed an invalid comparison to
date('50/50/1900')). The comparison is no longer needed. Post 5.0.03
PowerBuilder date type cannot contain an invalid date with an exception of
a null value.
Fix Release: 7.0GA, 6.5.1(y2kpatch), n/a for 5.0
CRs 162134 and 184373
Method: of_setdate
Fix: Add code to always redraw for date matching 1/1/1900 to allow date
display for January 1900. Previously the calendar did not redraw since the
initial value of the previous date was also 1/1/1900.
Fix Release: 7.0GA, 6.5.1(y2kpatch), n/a for 5.0
CRs 162134 and 184373
Method: of_reset
Fix: If the date is invalid set the calendar date to today's date.
Fix Release: 7.0GA, 6.5.1(y2kpatch), n/a for 5.0
*************** FILE END
Sheldon
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sharon Buntz [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 4:27 PM
> To: Yogesh Thakare; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: PFCSIG Y2K
>
> Tammy, Yogesh, All
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Can you still use the 6.5.1 pfc maintenance release without going to
> 6.5.1 powerbuilder?
> --
>
> Yes, I do believe that you can use PFC 6.5.1 with PB 6.5.0...
>
> 1) In general, you can use any future "point" PFC release with a given PB
> release - http://www.pfcguide.com/faq/faq_misc.asp#compatible
>
> 2) In addition, I do not believe that there were even ANY PFC changes
> from
> PFC 6.5.0 to PFC 6.5.1. At least, I cannot find any notes to indicate as
> such - no readme.txt, no comments in the code, even the official
> pfc_n_cst_debug still reports its version as 6.5.0. But it makes me
> wonder
> why they are calling it "PFC Y2K 5.0.04/6.5.1" versus saying
> "5.0.04/6.5.0/6.5.1" or such... Again, I could be wrong - and I would be
> very interested to know what the changes are if there were some. So
> please
> tell me if you know. Thanks!
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Does that mean the PB 6.5 Build 444 will also need a Y2k patch?
> --
>
> Yes, I do believe that PFC 6.5.0 needs the Y2K fixes...
>
> 1) First, I believe that there weren't any PFC changes from 6.5.0 to
> 6.5.1. (See Above.)
>
> 2) It is my understanding (99% sure) that... Technically, PFC 5.0.03(and
> lower) & 6.0 & 6.5 are not totally Y2K compliant ~ and even PFC 5.0.04 has
> at least one glitch. The Y2K fixes were not discovered and corrected
> until
> PFC 7.0. And that is why the official, special 5.0.04/6.5.1 PFC Y2K PBLs
> were created.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> More on PFC Y2K changes...
> --
>
> 1) Get the PBDJ Feb'99 issue! - It covers Y2K, totally, including PFC...
>
> a) The PBDJ February 1999 issue (Volume 6, Issue 2) contains an excellent
> article specifically on the PFC (complete with downloadable code), written
> by Brian Grimm.
>
> b) If you want to code the Y2K fixes yourself, you can download the PBDJ
> source code listings (all fixes) from here
> http://www.sys-con.com/pbdj/source/2-99/index.html
>
> c) If for some reason (people have told me), you are unable to receive
> PBDJ, *maybe* you can get an access code for a free digital copy from here
> http://www.sys-con.com/pbdj/pdf/intro2.htm
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> More on PB Y2K changes...
> --
>
> 1) The official Sybase Y2K info (including a letter, whitepapers, FAQs,
> the matrix and more) can be found at
>
> http://www.sybase.com/inc/corpinfo/year2000_index.html
>
> http://www.sybase.com/inc/corpinfo/year2000_whitepaper.html
> http://www.sybase.com/inc/corpinfo/year2000_faq.html
> http://www.sybase.com/inc/corpinfo/year2000_matrix.html
> http://www.sybase.com/inc/initiatives/sybase2000.html
>
> 2) Within the matrix, these are the versions deemed "Certified compliant"
>
>
> PowerBuilder (for Windows) 5.0.04, 3/31/98
> 6.0, 12/31/97
> PowerBuilder (for UNIX) 6.0
> + footnote regarding JDK1.0.2 not compliant
> Legal century range product operates within: 1000-3000
> Implied century rule: <50 = 2000, >49 = 1900
>
> 3) <Y2K> PBers, Are You Prepared for Y2K? Take the QUIZ! </Y2K>
> http://www.developower.com/Y2K_Problem.htm
>
> 4) By the way, the official Y2K Toons can be found at <g>
> http://www.glasbergen.com/y2k.html
>
> And the official Philosopher of the New Millennium can be found at <s>
> http://www.glasbergen.com/images/2000n.gif
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> New PFC Y2K problem? What to do if you discover a new PFC Y2K problem...
> --
>
> Do you know of any Y2K issues with the PFC - other than those listed in
> Brian Grimm's excellent PBDJ (Feb'99) PFC Y2K article?
>
> If so, please either...
>
> Post a note to the Sybase PFC Newsgroup at
> news://forums.powersoft.com/powersoft.public.powerbuilder.pfc
> (with a subject preferably beginning with: Y2K)
>
> or File an Electronic Case Management (ECM) at
> http://support.sybase.com/cm_choice.html
>
> or Call Technical Support at
> 1-800-8SYBASE
>
> or Email a note to a PFC Mail List such as
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] or
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (again, with a subject preferably beginning with: Y2K)
>
> or Feel free to write me at
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Your help is greatly appreciated.
>
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Someone please correct me if you think I could be wrong on any of these,
> or
> if you have any new PB/PFC Y2K information. Appreciate it. Thanks!
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>
>
> Have fun,
> ~Sharon
> --
> Sharon Weinstrom Buntz | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cheat Sheet for PFC/PB Help | http://www.pfccheatsheet.com/
>
>
>
> Yogesh Thakare wrote:
> >
> > Hi, Sharon
> >
> > Does that mean the PB 6.5 Build 444 will also need a Y2k patch?
> >
> > >From: Sharon Buntz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >To: Nandini Soundararajan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >Subject: Re: PFCSIG Y2K
> > >Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 02:45:40 -0500
> > >
> > >Official PFC Y2K Fixes for 5.0.04 and 6.5.1:
> > >http://download.sybase.com/esd/pbuilder_Y2K_win.html
> > >
> > >
> > >Nandini Soundararajan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi to all,
> > > >
> > > > I use PB6.5 with MS SQL Server v6.5 on WinNT v4.0.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to know whether PB6.5 is compatible on Y2K. If NO,
> should
> > >we
> > > > need to load any patch. Kindly suggest the website to get the patch
> to
> > > > overcome Y2K bug.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > SSN
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] HOSTED BY IIGG, INC. FOR HELP WITH LIST SERVE COMMANDS,
> ADDRESS
> > A MESSAGE TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] WITH THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE: help
> pfcsig
> > SEND ALL OTHER INQUIRES TO [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] HOSTED BY IIGG, INC. FOR HELP WITH LIST SERVE COMMANDS, ADDRESS
> A MESSAGE TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] WITH THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE: help pfcsig
> SEND ALL OTHER INQUIRES TO [EMAIL PROTECTED]
