also sprach GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.02.0610 +0200]:
> I agreed to Dickopp (you read the standard in detail). This is the
> implementation dependent behavior.
I never proposed to change the standard. I proposed to make use of
implementation-dependent freedom to implement timezon
At Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:39:08 +0200,
Martin Dickopp wrote:
> martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > also sprach Martin Dickopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.04.16.1552 +0200]:
> >> Therefore, any actual behavior (including the existing one as well
> >> as the suggested alternatives) would be
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> also sprach Martin Dickopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.04.16.1552 +0200]:
>> Therefore, any actual behavior (including the existing one as well
>> as the suggested alternatives) would be standard conforming.
>
> I don't think I was criticising standards
also sprach Martin Dickopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.04.16.1552 +0200]:
> Therefore, any actual behavior (including the existing one as well
> as the suggested alternatives) would be standard conforming.
I don't think I was criticising standards compliance...
> >From a QoI point of view, I'd pref
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sending to debian-devel because I would like to hear other people's
> opinions. It's about #271428, as the subject says. Please keep
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] on CC (I assume GOTO reads -devel).
>
> also sprach GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.04.16.1
Sending to debian-devel because I would like to hear other people's
opinions. It's about #271428, as the subject says. Please keep
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on CC (I assume GOTO reads -devel).
also sprach GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.04.16.1421 +0200]:
> Exactly, the problem is strftime. If yo
6 matches
Mail list logo
