On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:52:09PM +0200, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote:
> are taking rtc but correcting it with the timezone (and perhaps the -L),
Correction: if "-L", the userland parameter timezone is taken to correct
the RTC value. It seems that there is a hiatus (the reason why it was
precisely
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 02:55:32PM -0700, Bakul Shah wrote:
>
> Finally if you are running Windows 7 *and* have a recent
> hotfix 2800213 installed, you *can* use UTC in RTC by registry
> entry RealTimeIsUniversal=1. Or so I am told! Finally, 20+
> years later, microsoft does the right thing when
On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 15:30:03 +0200 tlaro...@polynum.com wrote:
> IIRC, I did not use this Plan9 node since the CET Saving Time switch.
>
> When verifying a directory listing (fossil) I saw:
>
> The correct date (time) on the file (I mean the correct time in CEST).
>
> An incorrect time on the co
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 12:59:22PM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
>
> are you sure that these flags might not be part of the problem?
> there is no clear answer to the question, "is rtc clock in local time
> or gmt?"
>
> -r synchronize to the local real time clock, #r/rtc.
>
>
On Tue Apr 23 12:16:36 EDT 2013, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:16:37AM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
> > > But this may affect the way the date is displayed, not the UTC?
> >
> > are you sure it's not a display issue? sometimes a double-timezone
> > conversion or incorre
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:16:37AM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
> > But this may affect the way the date is displayed, not the UTC?
>
> are you sure it's not a display issue? sometimes a double-timezone
> conversion or incorrect timezone conversion can screw up the date.
> fossil uses time(0), wh
> But this may affect the way the date is displayed, not the UTC?
are you sure it's not a display issue? sometimes a double-timezone
conversion or incorrect timezone conversion can screw up the date.
fossil uses time(0), which in theory should not conflict.
> >
> > 3. i think timesync(8) may h
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 09:34:46AM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
> is an independent /env for each process group, so it is entirely
> possible to have many values on the same system.
But this may affect the way the date is displayed, not the UTC?
>
> 3. i think timesync(8) may have the informati
> 1) How can fossil and the system display two different dates? Are they
> not using the very same system value?
>
> 2) Could it be that fossil takes CMOS and then continue on its own or
> takes CMOS constantly, while the kernel (?) takes CMOS, then leaves it
> alone, correct (wrongly) and counts
I was testing a new version of kerTeX (more changes to my compilation
framework---mainly around Windows Interix support) with Plan9 (new
version released BTW), and I stumbled once upon on date strange
behavior.
IIRC, I did not use this Plan9 node since the CET Saving Time switch.
When verifying a
10 matches
Mail list logo
