README.y2k revision 131702
141142Sobrien AM-UTILS YEAR-2000 COMPLIANCE 241142Sobrien 341142SobrienMost likely am-utils is y2k compliant. 441142Sobrien 541142SobrienI do not know for sure because I have not certified am-utils myself, nor do 641142SobrienI have the time for it. I do not think that amd will be affected by y2k at 741142Sobrienall, because it does not do anything with dates other than print the date on 841142Sobrienthe log file, in whatever format is provided by your os/libc --- especially 941142Sobrienthe ctime(3) call. 1041142Sobrien 1141142SobrienHowever, on Friday, September 18th 1998, Matthew Crosby <mcrosby@ms.com> 1241142Sobrienreported that they evaluated 6.0a16 and found it to be compliant. 1341142Sobrien 1451292SobrienOn March 26, 1999, Paul Balyoz <pbalyoz@sedona.ch.intel.com> submitted a 1551292Sobrienpatch to lostaltmail which makes it print Y2K compliant dates. He used a 1651292Sobriencode scanner and manually "eyeballed" the code and could not find any more 1751292Sobrienproblems. Paul's patch is included in am-utils-6.0.1s7 and newer versions. 1851292SobrienPaul also said that other 2-digit years used in am-utils are "harmless." 1951292Sobrien 2051292SobrienNOTE: NONE OF THE PERSONS MENTIONED HERE, AUTHOR INCLUDED, ARE WILLING TO 2151292SobrienCERTIFY AM-UTILS AS Y2K COMPLIANT. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. 2251292Sobrien 2351292Sobrien--- 2441142SobrienErez Zadok. 25131702SmbrMaintainer, am-utils package and am-utils list. 26131702SmbrEmail: am-utils@am-utils.org 2782794SobrienWWW: http://www.am-utils.org 28