X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_THEBAT X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 15:07:41 +0400 From: Andrey Repin Reply-To: Andrey Repin Message-ID: <60415272.20120123150741@mtu-net.ru> To: cygwin , cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: 1.7.9 : date command fails for year 1900 In-Reply-To: <4F1C73D6.10702@overbearing.org> References: <4F1A07F6.8010509@overbearing.org> <0105D5C1E0353146B1B222348B0411A20A51C5679C@NIHMLBX02.nih.gov> <4F1C73D6.10702@overbearing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 Greetings, cygwin! > Thanks for corroborating my finding. Does anybody else think it is odd > that this has not been pointed out before? My Ubuntu Hardy box exhibiting the same behavior. > Why would date use signed long integers to hold numbers of seconds? Because, you know, UNIX time is a number of seconds elapsed since midnight Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) of Thursday, January 1, 1970. It makes sense to define times before that as negative. I think, it's just a tradeoff you have to live with. For now, at least. -- WBR, Andrey Repin (anrdaemon@freemail.ru) 23.01.2012, <15:03> Sorry for my terrible english... -- 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