Re: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31

2003-01-30 Thread George Georgalis
- Forwarded message from "John H. Robinson, IV" - Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:50:38 -0800 From: "John H. Robinson, IV" Subject: Re: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] George Georgalis wrote: > > $ date --ve

Re: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31

2003-01-28 Thread George Georgalis
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 03:14:10PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: >On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 09:32, George Georgalis wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 11:36:36PM -0800, Eric G. Miller wrote: >> >On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:59:47PM -0500, Stan Heckman wrote: >> >> On my system, date -d returns "invalid date"

Re: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31

2003-01-28 Thread Ron Johnson
On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 09:32, George Georgalis wrote: > On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 11:36:36PM -0800, Eric G. Miller wrote: > >On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:59:47PM -0500, Stan Heckman wrote: > >> On my system, date -d returns "invalid date" for dates before 1970. It > >> is possible that this began when I

Re: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31

2003-01-28 Thread Eric G. Miller
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 10:32:45AM -0500, George Georgalis wrote: > On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 11:36:36PM -0800, Eric G. Miller wrote: > >On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:59:47PM -0500, Stan Heckman wrote: > >> On my system, date -d returns "invalid date" for dates before 1970. It > >> is possible that this

Re: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31

2003-01-28 Thread George Georgalis
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 11:36:36PM -0800, Eric G. Miller wrote: >On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:59:47PM -0500, Stan Heckman wrote: >> On my system, date -d returns "invalid date" for dates before 1970. It >> is possible that this began when I upgraded libc6. Any suggestions? > >1970-01-01 is time zero

Re: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31

2003-01-28 Thread John Hasler
nate writes: > not try to set your date to something thats not accurate? why would you > want to set your date in such a way anyways? He isn't trying to set a date. He is trying to _convert_ a date, one of the functions of 'date'. File a bug against 'date'. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jo

Re: OT: "S1G" (was Re: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31)

2003-01-28 Thread Colin Watson
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 01:53:52AM -0600, will trillich wrote: > time zero is 1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC, right? well, guess when we > passed time 999_999_999? > > $ perl -e 'print scalar gmtime 1_000_000_000;' > Sun Sep 9 01:46:40 2001 > > Second-One-Gig was 9-september, a bit past mid

OT: "S1G" (was Re: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31)

2003-01-28 Thread will trillich
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 11:36:36PM -0800, Eric G. Miller wrote: > On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:59:47PM -0500, Stan Heckman wrote: > > On my system, date -d returns "invalid date" for dates before 1970. It > > is possible that this began when I upgraded libc6. Any suggestions? > > 1970-01-01 is time

Re: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31

2003-01-27 Thread Eric G. Miller
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:59:47PM -0500, Stan Heckman wrote: > On my system, date -d returns "invalid date" for dates before 1970. It > is possible that this began when I upgraded libc6. Any suggestions? 1970-01-01 is time zero for *nixen. You're asking about what happened before the big bang!

Re: invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31

2003-01-27 Thread nate
Stan Heckman said: > On my system, date -d returns "invalid date" for dates before 1970. It is > possible that this began when I upgraded libc6. Any suggestions? not try to set your date to something thats not accurate? why would you want to set your date in such a way anyways? nate -- To U

invalid date from date -d 1969-12-31

2003-01-27 Thread Stan Heckman
On my system, date -d returns "invalid date" for dates before 1970. It is possible that this began when I upgraded libc6. Any suggestions? $ date -d 1969-12-31 date: invalid date `1969-12-31' $ date -d 1970-01-01 Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 EST 1970 $ uname -srpmvi Linux 2.4.18 #1 Fri Aug 16 15:40:44 EDT