On Fri, Jan 29, 1999 at 02:40:36PM -0500,
Peter Radcliffe <pir@???> is thought to have said:
> There is a comment on the web page:
> http://www-th.phys.rug.nl/~schut/gnulist.html
> stating that exim is not Y2k compliant:
>
> exim-2.02 1998-09-24 JJ.Schut NOT-OK Assumes year between
> 1990 and 2090 in smartuser.c, lines 243+.
> if (year < 90) year += 100;
> else if (year > 1900) year -= 1900;
>
> This doesn't make sense to me. If exim is ok until 2090, why is it not y2k
> safe ?
> (besides the point that using 2 digit years in any context is a Bad Thing).
It looks like his definition of "NOT-OK" is (from elsewhere on that page):
"Not compliant code is code which handles dates wrong in any sense. This
does not necessary mean that the package does not work anymore after
1999-12-31...Reason is that the package apparently expects the year to be
2-digit."
Looks like he's really only checking for 2 digit years.
Tabor
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Tabor J. Wells twells@???
Systems Administration Manager Just another victim of the ambient morality
Shore.Net -- High quality Internet access and hosting services since 1993
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
