On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
> I know of no time, or any reason, that means that exim ever has to parse
> and convert a date from user form into internal form, so 2 digit years
> should never be a problem.
... but you haven't got the latest development version! :-) The newly-
added "expiring address" facility (suggested by Brian Blackmore) does
have to do this. I have chosen to use 2-digit years, with the assumption
of the 21st century for all but those starting with "9". I shall
certainly have retired by 2090, and so, I suspect will Exim.
Apart from that, I don't think there are any problems. Exim writes its
log and "Received:" header timestamps using 4-digits years, so the
eximstats (and any other) utility that scans logs should continue to run
successfully. The form of timestamp used there (yyyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss) is
such that a lexical comparison works correctly.
Philip
--
Philip Hazel University Computing Service,
ph10@??? New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG,
P.Hazel@??? England. Phone: +44 1223 334714
