README.y2k revision 303975
1295011Sandrew AM-UTILS YEAR-2000 COMPLIANCE 2295011Sandrew 3295011SandrewMost likely am-utils is y2k compliant. 4295011Sandrew 5295011SandrewI do not know for sure because I have not certified am-utils myself, nor do 6295011SandrewI have the time for it. I do not think that amd will be affected by y2k at 7295011Sandrewall, because it does not do anything with dates other than print the date on 8295011Sandrewthe log file, in whatever format is provided by your os/libc --- especially 9295011Sandrewthe ctime(3) call. 10295011Sandrew 11295011SandrewHowever, on Friday, September 18th 1998, Matthew Crosby <mcrosby@ms.com> 12295011Sandrewreported that they evaluated 6.0a16 and found it to be compliant. 13295011Sandrew 14295011SandrewOn March 26, 1999, Paul Balyoz <pbalyoz@sedona.ch.intel.com> submitted a 15295011Sandrewpatch to lostaltmail which makes it print Y2K compliant dates. He used a 16295011Sandrewcode scanner and manually "eyeballed" the code and could not find any more 17295011Sandrewproblems. Paul's patch is included in am-utils-6.0.1s7 and newer versions. 18295011SandrewPaul also said that other 2-digit years used in am-utils are "harmless." 19295011Sandrew 20295011SandrewNOTE: NONE OF THE PERSONS MENTIONED HERE, AUTHOR INCLUDED, ARE WILLING TO 21295011SandrewCERTIFY AM-UTILS AS Y2K COMPLIANT. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. 22295011Sandrew 23295011Sandrew--- 24295011SandrewErez Zadok. 25295011SandrewMaintainer, am-utils package and am-utils list. 26295011SandrewEmail: am-utils@am-utils.org 27295011SandrewWWW: http://www.am-utils.org 28295011Sandrew