Problems with INN-2.2.3 and SuSE6.4

Michael Stassen stassenm at indiana.edu
Fri Dec 22 17:42:55 UTC 2000



On Fri, 22 Dec 2000, Katsuhiro Kondou wrote:

> 
> In article <Pine.GSO.4.21.0012211544140.680-100000 at jalapeno.ucs.indiana.edu>,
> 	Michael Stassen <stassenm at indiana.edu> wrote;
> 
> } I believe the checks should match the requirements, and we should handle
> } years 100, 101, etc. as years 2000, 2001, etc.  I propose the following:
> 
> I agree with this basically.  But I'm still unsure about
> large number of three digits like 300, 500 etc.  That
> should be treated 2200, 2400 and so on? 
> -- 
> Katsuhiro Kondou
> 

The current code treats 300 as 300, 500 as 500,...

In the unlikely event that the current code is still in place in 2200, and
some articles still arrive with a year of 300 instead of 2200, then yes, I
think 300 should be treated as 2200.  

As I see it, the portion of parsedate.y we're discussing assumes the input
year is valid, but may need conversion to a proper 4 digit year.  That is,
it currently does no error checking.  I'm not that familiar with the code,
but I've been assumimg that's done elsewhere, since this thread started
with a report of the year 100 being rejected, but this snippet of code
simply converts 100 to 100, it doesn't reject it.

There are certainly a lot of possible input years that would make no sense
(negative years, 4 digit years less than 1970 or so, 3 digit years that
would convert to years far in the future, 4 digit years far in the
future), and we could add lines to do something appropriate with them, if
that's needed here.

Michael Stassen
University Information Technology Services
Indiana University Bloomington
stassenm at indiana.edu





More information about the inn-workers mailing list