[John Horne]
> On 29-Jan-99 at 16:56:15 Nicholas Blackaby wrote:
> >
> > I presume that Exim is Year 2000 compliant? (I cannot find any
> > reference to this in the FAQ).
> >
> I asked Philip this the other day. There is a statement in the README file
> (e.g. exim-2.11/README).
This Thursdays issue of
www.slashdot.org mentioned (see <URL:
http://www.slashdot.org/articles/99/01/28/1229211.shtml>) a site that
claims to be keeping track of GNU apps and Y2K problems:
<URL:
http://www-th.phys.rug.nl/~schut/gnulist.html>
The page (apparently) hasn't been updated for a month and a half, but
Exim is listed as non-Y2K-compliant:
package version last entry who OK Why is it OK (or not)
--------------- ---------- --- -- ---------------------
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;
Looking at src/directors/smartuser.c in Exim 2.11, this comment is
placed immediately before the supposedly incorrect code:
/* Sort out the year; the value required is the number of years since 1900.
Any value less than 90 implies the 21st century. This introduces planned
obsolescence that will need fixing some time before the year 2090. I won't
be around, and I don't suppose Exim will be either. */
A bit modest maybe :), but it goes to show that the code in question
does not really have any Y2K-related problems.
... maybe someone should approach <schut@???> and ask
him to update his information on Exim (in order that the slashdot
effect doesn't lead too many potential Exim users astray)?
--
Harald
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
