>2011/7/13 Jim Pingle mailto:li...@pingle.org>>
>On 7/9/2011 9:17 PM, Dimitri Rodis wrote:
>> The system is and has been set to -8 (I am Pacific Daylight Time, USA), and
>> hasn't been re/booted since the first boot on that build--and I >have
>> reported this issue back in RC1 and it still appear
2011/7/13 Jim Pingle
> On 7/9/2011 9:17 PM, Dimitri Rodis wrote:
> > The system is and has been set to -8 (I am Pacific Daylight Time, USA),
> and hasn't been re/booted since the first boot on that build--and I have
> reported this issue back in RC1 and it still appears to be an issue. It
> almos
On 7/9/2011 9:17 PM, Dimitri Rodis wrote:
> The system is and has been set to -8 (I am Pacific Daylight Time, USA), and
> hasn't been re/booted since the first boot on that build--and I have reported
> this issue back in RC1 and it still appears to be an issue. It almost looks
> as if the check_
>On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Vick Khera wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Dimitri Rodis
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have my log set to show newest on top, and the log is "mostly" in
>>> order, but notice how there are some entries that are in the middle
>>> of this screenshot that are "new
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Vick Khera wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Dimitri Rodis
> wrote:
>>
>> I have my log set to show newest on top, and the log is “mostly” in order,
>> but notice how there are some entries that are in the middle of this
>> screenshot that are “newer” than e
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Dimitri Rodis wrote:
> I have my log set to show newest on top, and the log is “mostly” in order,
> but notice how there are some entries that are in the middle of this
> screenshot that are “newer” than everything else. (The problem is that Jul 8
> 15:12:29 has no
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Dimitri Rodis
wrote:
> Can anyone else confirm what appears to be either a bug in the logging with
> respect to the timestamps or a bug in the sorting of the log entries? (I
> don’t know which)
I've seen it here and I suspect the problem is with the timestamps,
2.0-RC3 (i386)
built on Mon Jun 27 13:31:27 EDT 2011
Can anyone else confirm what appears to be either a bug in the logging with
respect to the timestamps or a bug in the sorting of the log entries? (I don't
know which)
I have my log set to show newest on top, and the log is "mostly" in order,
