On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 02:14, Tom Lane wrote: > =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Trond_Eivind_Glomsr=F8d?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Relying on nonstandardized/nondocumented behaviour is a program bug, not a > > glibc bug. PostgreSQL needs fixing. Since we ship both, we're looking at > > it, but glibc is not the component with a problem. > > A library that can no longer cope with dates before 1970 is NOT my idea > of a component without a problem. We will be looking at ways to get > around glibc's breakage at the application level, since we have little > alternative other than to declare Linux an unsupported platform; > but it's still glibc (and the ISO spec:-() that are broken.
IIRC the spec is not _really_ broken - it still allows the correct behaviour :) 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. Most likely they have fixed it by now ... Does anyone know _any_ other libc that has this behaviour ? -------------- Hannu ---------------------------(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
