| From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ulrich Drepper <drepper(at)redhat(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>, Trond Eivind Glomsrød <teg(at)redhat(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, Manuel Sugawara <masm(at)fciencias(dot)unam(dot)mx>, PostgreSQL Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Redhat 7.3 time manipulation bug |
| Date: | 2002-05-23 14:39:38 |
| Message-ID: | 20020523113641.T12810-100000@mail1.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
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?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | D'Arcy J.M. Cain | 2002-05-23 14:42:42 | Re: Edge case problem with pg_dump |
| Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2002-05-23 14:36:35 | Re: Redhat 7.3 time manipulation bug |