Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com From: "Lothan" To: , Subject: RE: date +%Z Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 22:58:59 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: <200102011710.TAA12558@linux.> Importance: Normal > From: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com > [mailto:cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com]On Behalf Of Ehud Karni > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 9:11 AM > To: cygwin@cygwin.com > Subject: Re: date +%Z > > This is the code in shellutils-src.tar.gz, but it is NOT the current > GNU code. > > > If anyone is interested, could you let the maintainer of the > date code know > > about this? There is probably a GNU maintainer but I don't > know who it is. > > Chris, You have spoken without checking the (GNU) sources first (see my > code snippet above). This is NOT a GNU problem (even if the 1 line in > the date check was like the GNU version, there would be no bug). The > problem is the porting to Cygwin. > > I've checked the date.c and strftime.c on shellutils-src.tar.gz (of > 2000-01-18 from ftp.sunet.se) these sources are from 1997-11-06. So it > is probably based on based on sh-utils-1.16.tar.gz from 1997-01-27. May > be a new port of sh-utils is in order (and if you tell me to take it on > myself, I'm willing but it will take some time). I just compiled sh-utils-2.0.tar.gz from ftp.gnu.org and it passed all 103 tests. No changes were required. -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple