---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 08:39:07 -0500 From: "Bunch, John F" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Bug#3087 acknowledged by developer (was: Bug in date.)
>>I am closing this bug report because setting the motherboard clock is >>not the responsibility of date(1), nor is it the responsibility of the >>date(1) man page to mention the motherboard clock. >> >>-- >>Scott Barker >>Linux Consultant >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Dear Mr. Barker: You stated that setting the motherboard clock is not the responsibility of date(1). Since you did not reference any requirements document, I can neither confirm nor deny the validity of your statement. However, the AT&T UNIX System V Release 3 User's Reference Manual (Copyright 1986 AT&T) clearly states that the date(1) command can be used to set the current date. On all implementations of UNIX that I have used (e.g. Ultrix, HP-UX, CLIX, Solaris) the date command does set the hardware clock. The Linux date(1) command works quite differently than the date(1) command in UNIX, because its effects are temporary, not permanent. This difference in implementations greatly confused me, and I suspect that other new users who have UNIX experience will also be confused. In order to reduce the chance of confusion, I would appreciate it if you would consider editing the manual page for date(1) to more precisely explain what date(1) does and does not do. Furthermore, most manual pages contain cross references to related manual pages. Therefore, it would also be quite considerate to add clock(1) to the SEE ALSO section of the date manual page. Sincerely, John F. Bunch Software Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
