Dave Stites <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><html>
>Hi List,<br>
><br>
Hi. <brr> It's cold here, too.
>Sorry but I became a little lost here in following the gentle roasting
>and the only "reason" I found was one of those "if you
>don't already know why not - don't do it" variety which, since I do
>*not* "already know" causes me to raise the question.<br>
><br>
>Is there any valid technical reason for *not* applying John Saunder's
><font color="#0000FF"><u>patch to date822fmt.c</font></u> which causes it
>to emit dates in the local timezone which I found on
><a href="http://www.qmail.org/" eudora="autourl">www.</a>qmail<a
>href="http://www.qmail.org/" eudora="autourl">.org</a>?<br>
1. Since Received timestamps are generated by sites all over the
world, one can either log the local time, which is convenient for
people who happen to be in that time zone, but inconvenient for
everyone else--or one can log a "universal" time, which is mildly
inconvenient for most people, but which makes it much easier to
track delivery times in received header fields of messages that
traverse timezones.
2. Dan went to great lengths to avoid *ever* linking against the
standard C runtime library. Converting to localtime requires doing
so. Dan had good (security, obesity) reasons for avoiding libc.
3. This has nothing to do with timezones: HTML mail is annoying.
-Dave
