Re: [HACKERS] The rh7.3 time errors

2002-09-28 Thread Magnus Naeslund(f)
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The change was to use localtime() rather than mktime() in the code. > There is no workaround available for 7.2.X, and I don't see that > anyone backpatched it to 7.2 CVS. However, we are considering a > 7.2.3 and a backpatch of that fix may be worthwh

Re: [HACKERS] The rh7.3 time errors

2002-09-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
Magnus Naeslund(f) wrote: > Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Magnus Naeslund(f) wrote: > >> Was there a workaround for the errors in time handling for rh7.3 > >> dist? > >> > >> I get there regression failures: > >> abstime ... FAILED > >> tinterval...

Re: [HACKERS] The rh7.3 time errors

2002-09-28 Thread Magnus Naeslund(f)
Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Magnus Naeslund(f) wrote: >> Was there a workaround for the errors in time handling for rh7.3 >> dist? >> >> I get there regression failures: >> abstime ... FAILED >> tinterval... FAILED >> test horology ... F

Re: [HACKERS] The rh7.3 time errors

2002-09-28 Thread Joe Conway
Magnus Naeslund(f) wrote: > Was there a workaround for the errors in time handling for rh7.3 dist? > > I get there regression failures: > abstime ... FAILED > tinterval... FAILED > test horology ... FAILED > > I remember the discussion about old dat

[HACKERS] The rh7.3 time errors

2002-09-28 Thread Magnus Naeslund(f)
Was there a workaround for the errors in time handling for rh7.3 dist? I get there regression failures: abstime ... FAILED tinterval... FAILED test horology ... FAILED I remember the discussion about old dates, but not if there was any fix for it...