Re: AW: AW: [HACKERS] Re: tinterval - operator problems on AIX

2001-01-12 Thread Tom Lane
Zeugswetter Andreas SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes, the annoyance is, that localtime works for dates before 1970 > but mktime doesn't. Best would probably be to assume no DST before > 1970 on AIX and IRIX. That seems like a reasonable answer to me, especially since we have other platforms

Re: AW: AW: [HACKERS] Re: tinterval - operator problems on AIX

2001-01-11 Thread Pete Forman
Pete Forman writes: > One workaround would be to add 4*n to tm_year and subtract (365*4+1) > *24*60*60*n from the time_t returned. (All leap years are multiples > of 4 in the range 1901 to 2038. If tm_wday is wanted, that will need > to be adjusted as well.) FWIW, that should be to add 28*n

Re: AW: AW: [HACKERS] Re: tinterval - operator problems on AIX

2001-01-11 Thread Pete Forman
Zeugswetter Andreas SB writes: > Try the attachment with negative values, and tell us whether mktime > returns anything other that -1. Do you have an idea how else we > could determine daylight savings time ? mktime always returns -1 for tm's that might expect to return a negative number. In

Re: AW: AW: [HACKERS] Re: tinterval - operator problems on AIX

2001-01-10 Thread Thomas Lockhart
> > > On AIX mktime(3) leaves tm_isdst at -1 if it does not have timezone > > > info for that particular year and returns -1. > > > The following code then makes savings time out of the -1. > > > tz = (tm->tm_isdst ? (timezone - 3600) : timezone); > > Hmm. That description is consistant with wha