X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT 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 DOT 56364lzi64m7t4d3 AT messagerie DOT si DOT c-s DOT fr> <4DF10C13 DOT 3040208 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> <811AA35F-E300-46E5-9FE3-EE7D5E58194B AT free DOT fr> <20110609210632 DOT GA1457 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4E1EF031-A2E0-4238-BD23-5089E2D7670F AT free DOT fr> <20110610142124 DOT GA5849 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <1D852702-CB83-4DAA-A31A-D3F8A01E432A AT free DOT fr> From: Edward McGuire Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:06:46 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: cygcheck's understanding of TZ To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT 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