Angel Fradejas wrote:
>
> Hi Stipe,
>
> Here you have the patch to date.c
patch applied to cvs.
I'm not sure on the impact, but since there we no objections from the
others here we are. If something breaks please complain ASAP.
Stipe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Hi Stipe,
Here you have the patch to date.c
Angel Fradejas.
-Mensaje original-
De: Stipe Tolj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Enviado el: martes 15 de enero de 2002 12:12
Para: Angel Fradejas
CC: Kannel Developers
Asunto: Re: timestamps with emi2
please send fixes in "diff -u&qu
please send fixes in "diff -u" format attached as plain/text to the
devel@ list.
There are a couple of guys working (more or less) as active CVS
commiters, see ChangeLog. If your patch doesn't get applied for some
days ask someone personaly to commit it.
When you have contributed some patches we
s the way to send fixes? Is
there anybody responsible to commit the CVS changes?
-Mensaje original-De: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]En nombre de Dima
MilentievEnviado el: martes 15 de enero de 2002
9:12Para: Angel Fradejas; Kannel DevelopersAsunto: RE:
times
Hi all,
It seams we mix here something.
We do parsing but if only if we have
problem we entry in branch and call date_convert_universal():
if
(octstr_parse_long(&unitime.second,
tempstr, 10, 10) != 12 ||
(octstr_delete(tempstr, 10, 2),
>>I think the problem is in de date.c function date_convert_universal:
>>line 81: date += monthstart[t->month] * DAY;
>>Shouldn't it be
>>line 81: date += monthstart[t->month-1] * DAY;
>>?
>>Or am I doing something wrong?
>>I need exacts timestamps because we have to do accounting fo the
