On 22 May 2002, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 11:23, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Unix systems have > > *always* interpreted time_t as a signed offset from the epoch. > > No. This always was an accident if it happens. > > > Do you > > really think that when Unixen were first built in the early 70s, there > > was no interest in working with pre-1970 dates? Hardly likely. > > There never were files or any system events with these dates. Yes. > > And just to educate you and your likes: the majority of systems on this > planet use mktime this way. I hate using this as an argument, but > beside major Unixes M$ systems also do this.
M$ systems crashes regularly too ... is Redhat going to adopt that too? ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
