Re: [HACKERS] Problem with copying abstimes

With Shakespearian flourish, Roger Florkowski writes
> > Hey Darren or Frank, you haven't indicated how stale AIX 3.2.5 is. Why
> > should anyone keep spending time on it when AIX 4.1 is available?
>
> (speaking for Frank) [...]

Now there's a twist on std.disclaimer! "I don't speak for my company,
but they speak for me!"  <grin>

Here's what I was going to send on the matter -- I was hoping to put
this at the bottom of na "I finally got it working!" message, but I
haven't yet. 8-P

With Shakespearian flourish, "Thomas G. Lockhart" writes:
> btw, how stale is 3.2.5? Would it be appropriate to declare pre-v4.1 AIX
> as "unsupported"?

IMHO that's inappropriate, as even IBM hasn't done that yet. (They plan
to in December, last I heard.) It's certainly more supported (tho less
widely used) than SunOS.

This problem isn't just limited to AIX anyway -- any system that doesn't
have an int timezone would be affected, as the bug is in the code that
handles timezone information when the timezone int (or the tm_gmtoff
element in struct tm) is not available. Of course, NeXTstep seems to
be the only other one that fits that category, and it's probably going
away. While it would be convenient to drop AIX 3.2.5 and make this
datetime bug disappear, I'll have it cleaned up shortly and then of
any new (old) systems come along that need it, the code will be there.

The rest of the AIX 3.2.5 problems Darren seems to have corrected.

- --
   Frank R. Dana, Jr.                Senior Associate Programmer
   danaf@ans.net                     ANS Communications
   (914) 789-5449                    100 Clearbrook Rd. Elmsford, NY 10523
   Pager: 800-946-4646 pin# 1420717

------------------------------