Date:	Thu, 21 Dec 2000 11:04:06 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Jason Green <news AT jgreen4 DOT fsnet DOT co DOT uk>
cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: strftime: Need Help with Time Offsets
In-Reply-To:	<1a524t0tk28cmv3vqfq26tooe0qeikhgm5@4ax.com>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1001221110346.28580O-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Jason Green wrote:

> ftilley AT azstarnet DOT cyberbromo DOT com (Felix Tilley) wrote:
> 
> > All of the GMT offsets are wrong.  Dates and times are correct, but
> > the GMT offsets are wrong.
> 
> There appears to be a bug in strftime() when using the %z format.

The bug, whether it exists or not, does not necessarily have anything
to do with what Felix reported: I replied to his message saying I
cannot reproduce the problem.  His test program wroked for me.  I
suspect Felix was using an old djtzn203.zip, where timezone files were
corrupted.

> Well, actually not so much a bug as a feature. ;-)

Actually, %z is undocumented and should not be used at all in the
DJGPP version of strftime.

> With existing strftime the test program outputs:
> 
> Wed, 20 Dec 2000 20:35:42 +0000 GMT
> Wed, 20 Dec 2000 20:35:42 +0000 GMT
> Wed, 20 Dec 2000 08:01:42 -0000 TEST1
> Thu, 21 Dec 2000 09:09:42 +45240 TEST2
> 
> After patching the test program outputs:
> 
> Wed, 20 Dec 2000 20:36:21 +0000 GMT
> Wed, 20 Dec 2000 20:36:21 +0000 GMT
> Wed, 20 Dec 2000 08:02:21 -1234 TEST1
> Thu, 21 Dec 2000 09:10:21 +1234 TEST2

Note that your changes modified the bahavior of %z: it is supposed to
print the values in seconds, while your version prints it in hours and
minutes instead.  So this is more than just a bugfix for the negative
offsets.

> Here is the patch:

Thanks.

- Raw text -