X-Authentication-Warning:	kendall.sfbr.org: jeffw set sender to jeffw AT darwin DOT sfbr DOT org using -f
Date:	Thu, 8 Aug 2002 08:22:49 -0500
From:	JT Williams <jeffw AT darwin DOT sfbr DOT org>
To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com, Prashant TR <tr AT midpec DOT com>
Subject:	Re: problem with 'date' (sh-utils 2.0.11)
Message-ID:	<20020808132249.GA9185@kendall.sfbr.org>
Mail-Followup-To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>, djgpp AT delorie DOT com,
	Prashant TR <tr AT midpec DOT com>
References:	<20020807123616 DOT GA1905 AT kendall DOT sfbr DOT org> <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1020808081238 DOT 4988E-100000 AT is>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1020808081238.4988E-100000@is>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.4i
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

Yes, that seems quite possible.  Our time_t is 'unsigned int' and
(according to `man types') my Solaris box typedef's it to 'long'.  OTOH,
ISTR having the same problem even without the "+%s" format, which might
suggest that the type of time_t is not an issue (unless 'date' does
some internal conversion elsewhere for which our time_t is a problem).
I'll look into it a bit more.

-: Whether time_t data type can express the time before the epoch is 
-: system-dependent, I think (depends on the typedef for time_t: how wide it 
-: is and whether it's signed or unsigned).

- Raw text -