On Sun Mar 18 16:11:55 2001 Carel Fellinger wrote...
>
>On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 03:07:55PM -0500, Stan Brown wrote:
>> On Sun Mar 18 12:40:10 2001 Carel Fellinger wrote...
>> >Not sure, but are you applying that offset yourself? If so, are you
>> >aware that "hwclock --show" always shows the *local* time? Anyhow,
>> >what's the content of /etc/adjtime? On my machine it has a line saying:
>> >
>>
>> /etc/adjtime does have a line whose contents are UTC. And /etc/timezone
>> has US/Eastern in it. Acording to my reconicking UTC ast I write this
>> should be
>> Sun Mar 18 20:05:59 GMT 2001, that's Sun Mar 18 15:06:27 EST 2001, in
>> the US's
>> Eastern time zone. hwclock --show shows 22:59 .
>
>I'm no time expert, just thinking that maybe al is swell afterall.
>So could you post the outcome of the following commands?
>
> # date && hwclock --show
Script started on Mon Mar 19 01:18:10 2001
yogi:~# date
Mon Mar 19 01:18:13 EST 2001
yogi:~# hwclock --show
Mon Mar 19 01:18:21 2001 -0.495009 seconds
yogi:~# echo $TZ
yogi:~# cat /etc/timezone
US/Eastern
yogi:~#
Script done on Mon Mar 19 01:18:41 2001
>
>Both should show the same time. You see hwclock doesn't show utc time,
>but local time (sorry if this was clear to you, but I somehow have the
>feeling that you are still doing some calculation yourself. Bytheway,
>the times you mention above don't make sense to me, I thought US/Eastern
>was a whole number of hours from utc, the minutes should stay the same)
>
>The other thing that could interfere is if you've set the TZ environment
>variable.
OK, I'm totaly confused. There are 3 things involved here, as I see it.
The
hardware clock, which should be set to UTC. The kernels view of time,
which
should be the same as the hardware clock modified by the value of
/etc/timezone, and the "user" view of time which should be UTC
modifiedby
whatever they have set TZ to, or if they have not set it, modified by
what's in
/etc/timezone.
Have I got that correct?
If so why does my machine think it's 1 oclock tomorow morning? It's
really
about 18:30 EST.
Please explain what I'm looking at wrong here.
Thanks for the help.
--
Stan Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] 843-745-3154
Charleston SC.
--
Windows 98: n.
useless extension to a minor patch release for 32-bit extensions and
a graphical shell for a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system
originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor, written by a 2-bit
company that can't stand for 1 bit of competition.
-
(c) 2000 Stan Brown. Redistribution via the Microsoft Network is prohibited.
