Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 15:16:00 +0300 (EEST) From: Martti Kuparinen <martti@research.zopps.fi> To: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: CVS must be updated (Re: Year 2000) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9904231459410.4799-100000@ws70.research.zopps.fi> In-Reply-To: <199904231136.PAA44330@diamond.ripn.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 23 Apr 1999, Ilya Varlashkin wrote:
> "After extensive analysis and testing, we believe that
> FreeBSD is 100% Y2K compliant...." (from that page)
Well, I think both 2.2.8-STABLE and 3.1-STABLE (as of today)
are *NOT* 100% Y2K compliant because they both include CVS 1.9.26:
-----
ws74:~> uname -r
2.2.8-STABLE
ws74:~> cvs -v
Concurrent Versions System (CVS) 1.9.26 (client/server)
and
bastion:~> uname -r
3.1-STABLE
bastion:~> cvs -v
Concurrent Versions System (CVS) 1.9.26 (client/server)
-----
According to http://www.cyclic.com/cvs/info-y2k.html:
"Do not plan to continue to use CVS 1.9 or older beyond the year 2000.
Such versions of CVS have known bugs in their ability to handle dates
beyond 2000. These bugs are fixed in CVS 1.10, and we recommend an upgrade
to CVS 1.10 some time before the year 2000."
I saw that 1.10 is now in -CURRENT but I sure hope 3.2-RELEASE will
contain the new 1.10 version as well... Or is 1.9.26 in fact Y2K compliant?
Btw, is 2.2.8-STABLE going to be updated to version 1.10?
Martti
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9904231459410.4799-100000>