Nagios Support Forum

--=-L9SapxTXauBNsJ+elT+5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; DelSp=Yes; Format=Flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Am 15.03.10 20:42 schrieb(en) Ton Voon:
> This patch was applied to Nagios Core and was in 3.2.0. I've fixed a spec=
ific problem last year with timeperiods when DST moved back one hour, but I=
didn't change the other occurrences of this patch. My feeling was to get a=
test case for the specific changes before reverting the patch.
>=20
> However, I think there are still some timezone issues (as mentioned by Ma=
rk Frost on nagios-users), so I'm thinking that I should revert the entire =
patch and instead say that if you want to add the isdst=3D-1 in, then add t=
est cases in.

The POSIX standard says [1]


A positive or 0 value for tm_isdst shall cause mktime() to presume initiall=
y that Daylight Savings Time, respectively, is or is not in effect for the =
specified time. A negative value for tm_isdst shall cause mktime() to attem=
pt to determine whether Daylight Savings Time is in effect for the specifie=
d time.


Thus, unless you know for sure that daylight savings is in effect or not fo=
r a specific date, /not/ using tm_isdst Opinions?

What should be the purpose of a test case if the code strictly follows POSI=
X?

Best, Albrecht.

[1]

--=-L9SapxTXauBNsJ+elT+5
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBLnpQ3n/9unNAn/9ERAgO6AJ96F9vcDov/Yvk8YixG15PbPNvgkgCfaUzj
47ydN53orlitJE/gpDMPCcg=
=EYr4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-L9SapxTXauBNsJ+elT+5--





This post was automatically imported from historical nagios-devel mailing list archives
Original poster: [email protected]