On Wed, 22 May 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote: > > IIRC the spec is not _really_ broken - it still allows the correct > > behaviour :) > > Yes. > > > The fact the ISO spec is broken usually means that at least one of the > > big vendors involved in ISO spec creation must have had a broken > > implementation at that time. > > Right. IBM. > > > Most likely they have fixed it by now ... > > Nope, though I don't know for sure. Anyone here have a recent AIX > machine to test? > > > Does anyone know _any_ other libc that has this behaviour ? > > AIX and (I think) Irix. > > Trond, do you have a suggestion on how to get this addressed at the > glibc level? Does someone within RH participate in glibc development?
Jakub Jelinek, Ulrich Drepper and others. > If so, can we get them to champion changes which would comply with the > standard but remove this arbitrary breakage? Unlikely. They already saw (and participated, at least Ulrich) a thread on this with Lamar. Their take is "this is the standard, you should do what the standard says and not rely on undocumented, non-standardized sideeffects. > The changes would involve returning -1 from mktime() for dates before > 1970, and using the tm_isdst flag to indicate whether a time zone > translation was not possible. -- Trond Eivind Glomsrød Red Hat, Inc. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
