From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19969 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2011 15:07:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 19961 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Jun 2011 15:07:22 -0000 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 Received: from mail-vx0-f171.google.com (HELO mail-vx0-f171.google.com) (209.85.220.171) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 15:07:07 +0000 Received: by vxh11 with SMTP id 11so1047088vxh.2 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 08:07:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.95.148 with SMTP id dk20mr1644815vdb.120.1307977626139; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 08:07:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.113.6 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Jun 2011 08:06:46 -0700 (PDT) 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 15:07:00 -0000 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-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2011-06/txt/msg00128.txt.bz2 > 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