Re: Y2K bug in glibc 2.0?! (was: cnet picks Corel as #1 over RedHat & Caldera)

[Bernhard Rosenkraenzer]

On Mon, 13 Dec 1999, Thomas Ribbrock (Design/DEG) wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 13, 1999 at 05:40:58PM +0100, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer wrote:
> [...]
> > in bind, two more in proftpd]), not Y2K save (they're still using glibc
> > 2.0, which has a known Y2K bug), buggy, and nonstandard (why did they
> [...]
> 
> Wait a minute - RHL 5.2 is using glibc 2.0 as well, isn't it? Why has
> there never been any mention of this by Red Hat - if not a fix?
> 
> Could you supply more info or maybe a pointer to more info?

I just remember having read about the problem somewhere. I don't remember
what exactly was up; I think it was some bug in strftime().

I don't think it'll have other effects than some output looking weird
(logfiles suddenly getting entries from 1900).

LLaP
bero

-- 
Nobody will ever need more than 640 kB RAM.
                -- Bill Gates, 1983
Windows 98 requires 16 MB RAM.
                -- Bill Gates, 1999
Nobody will ever need Windows 98.
                -- logical conclusion


-- 
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.