Newsgroups: news.software.b
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: warning to all sinners in regard to current C News patches
Message-ID: <1991Mar27.190459.9384@zoo.toronto.edu>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1991 19:04:59 GMT
References: <1991Mar24.035259.20738@zoo.toronto.edu> <9ICP05C@methan.chemie.fu-berlin.de> <1991Mar24.220537.14059@zoo.toronto.edu> <1991Mar27.152155.27218@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1991Mar27.152155.27218@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil> rdc30@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil (LCDR Michael E. Dobson) writes:
>The following date is unparsable according to Cnews patch 24Mar91:
>
>Mon Mar 25 20:40:20 1991 MET +0100

This is not a valid RFC1036 date because it is neither ctime(3) format
(which 1036 encourages you to accept for backward compatibility) nor
RFC 822 format.  You can't specify both an alphabetic timezone and
a numeric timezone; it has to be one or the other.

>"since older software still generates this format, news implementations are
>encouraged to accept this format and translate it into an acceptable format."
>
>Am I correct in assuming that C-News will no longer tolerate this "sin"?

The quoted phrase refers to ctime(3) format, which this date isn't.

However, your conclusion -- that C News will not tolerate this date --
is correct.
-- 
"[Some people] positively *wish* to     | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
believe ill of the modern world."-R.Peto|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry