| From: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Oliver Elphick <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Redhat 7.3 time manipulation bug |
| Date: | 2002-05-21 22:47:05 |
| Message-ID: | 200205211847.05321.lamar.owen@wgcr.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tuesday 21 May 2002 06:09 pm, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-05-21 at 18:24, Lamar Owen wrote:
> > In any case, this isn't just a Red Hat problem, as it's going to cause
> > problems with the use of timestamps on ANY glibc 2.2.5 dist. That's more
> > than Red Hat, by a large margin.
> I'm running glibc 2.2.5 on Debian and all regression tests pass OK (with
> make check). I don't see any note in the glibc Debian changelog about
> reversing an upstream change to mktime().
> I missed the first messages in this thread and I can't find them in the
> archive. What should I be looking for to see if I have the problem you
> have encountered or to see why I don't have it if I ought to have?
Hmmm. Compile and run the attached program. If you get -1, it's the new
behavior. It might be interesting to see the differences here.....
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| mktime-bug.c | text/x-csrc | 433 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-05-21 22:56:59 | Shouldn't large objects be MVCC-aware? |
| Previous Message | Oliver Elphick | 2002-05-21 22:09:58 | Re: Redhat 7.3 time manipulation bug |