This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: 1.7.9 : date command fails for year 1900
- From: "Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E]" <BBuchbinder at niaid dot nih dot gov>
- To: "cygwin at cygwin dot com" <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 18:30:50 -0500
- Subject: RE: 1.7.9 : date command fails for year 1900
Keith Christian sent the following at Monday, January 23, 2012 2:00 PM
>> cygwin sent the following at Sunday, January 22, 2012 3:39 PM
>On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E]
>> /c> cal 9 1752
>> September 1752
>> Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
>> 1 2 14 15 16
>> 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
>> 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
>> Is this a bug?
>Not a bug, see: http://www.infoplease.com/spot/gregorian1.html.
Just for the record (and my self-respect), that was a rhetorical
question. (Or was it sarcastic?)
9/1752 was the transition only for Great Britain and its
dependencies. See Wikipedia for other places.
(I especially like Alaska, which combined a changed calendar with
a shift of the International Dateline.)
So (rhetorical) questions for the OP would be how to fix
- date and cal so that they properly take into account changes to
calendars in different locations.
- date to account for leap seconds.
Also, the OP asked why a signed long integer. See
Disclaimer: Statements made herein are not made on behalf of NIAID.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple