Pro/Venix and Y2K

[Tim Shoppa]

>There's some confusion about this (at least in my mind), so any
>authoritative info would be interesting.

I agree - and would love more definitive information (Or, even
better, the sources to Pro/Venix.)  I've
learned an amazing amount about segments of the Unix lineage
just from the comments in the past week, but the gaps in
my knowledge still loom large!

It's entirely possible that Pro/Venix uses the Pro
clock in BCD mode - it looked to me that the 2.9BSD version
does it in binary mode.

>struct clkbuf {
>	int clk_sec;	/* second (0-59) */
>	int clk_min;	/* minute (0-59) */
>	int clk_hour;	/* hour (0-23) */
>	int clk_mday;	/* day of month (1-31) */
>	int clk_mon;	/* month (0-11) */
>	int clk_year;	/* year (00-99) */
>	int clk_wday;	/* day of the week (Sunday = 0) */
>	int clk_yday;	/* day of the year (0-365) */
>	int clk_dst;	/* non-zero if daylight savings applies */
>};
>
>So, it looks bad at least from the internal representation of the
>year.

It depends on what you want to call "bad".  It's quite possible
to build a Y2K compliant system out of non-Y2K compliant
components!

2.11BSD's date(1) was patched for Y2K in such a way that "00" in
the two-digit year would be interpreted as the year 2000.  (See
patch #327 for the details.)

Would similar fixes for more historic Unices be useful to the general
folk here?

-- 
 Tim Shoppa                        Email: shoppa at trailing-edge.com
 Trailing Edge Technology          WWW:   http://www.trailing-edge.com/
 7328 Bradley Blvd		   Voice: 301-767-5917
 Bethesda, MD, USA 20817           Fax:   301-767-5927

Received: (from major at localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id GAA22638
	for pups-liszt; Fri, 27 Nov 1998 06:50:39 +1100 (EST)
	(envelope-from owner-pups at minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au)