X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST,TW_YG,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1D852702-CB83-4DAA-A31A-D3F8A01E432A@free.fr> References: <20110609094631.56364lzi64m7t4d3@messagerie.si.c-s.fr> <4DF10C13.3040208@cwilson.fastmail.fm> <811AA35F-E300-46E5-9FE3-EE7D5E58194B@free.fr> <20110609210632.GA1457@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <4E1EF031-A2E0-4238-BD23-5089E2D7670F@free.fr> <20110610142124.GA5849@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <1D852702-CB83-4DAA-A31A-D3F8A01E432A@free.fr> From: Edward McGuire Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:06:46 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: cygcheck's understanding of TZ To: cygwin@cygwin.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com > On 2011-06-10 16:21, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> we still have no idea [...] why you find it so crucial for >> cygcheck to report the date with pinpoint accuracy On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 12:44, Denis Excoffier wrote: > Wrong by 1h is not pinpoint accuracy (i think). I realize I don't have a vote, but I disagree with your patch. Idiot proofing cygcheck(1) by forcing GMT on the user is overkill. cygcheck(1) only gives invalid output when it gets invalid input. Did cygcheck(1) and date(1) both give valid output with TZ=CET-1CEST? Cheers, MetaEd -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple