Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!uunet!math.fu-berlin.de!ira.uka.de!unido!sapwdf!wohler From: wohler@sapwdf.UUCP (Bill Wohler) Newsgroups: comp.mail.mh Subject: Re: FAQ Message-ID: <2764@sapwdf.UUCP> Date: 25 Apr 91 15:48:42 GMT References: <27913.670882599@castor> <1991Apr5.235625.3788@ns.uoregon.edu> Reply-To: Bill Wohler Organization: SAP AG, Walldorf, Germany Lines: 42 [this was posted a while ago, but i don't think it hit the airwaves. --bw] folks, the section in the FAQ about compiling options generated some controversy this month. first, regarding ATZ: From: Tony Landells Yes; very pretty. How unfortunate that timezone names are so ambiguous, so that EST can be interpreted, at a minimum, as (American) Eastern Standard Time, (Australian) Eastern Standard Time, or (Australian) Eastern Summer Time (and yes, I think it's dumb having the same acronym for both normal and Summer time, but that's a different problem). While the numeric timezones may not look as nice, they are, at least, reasonably unambiguous. I would urge anyone who ever intends/hopes/expects to use e-mail outside the U.S. to NOT use ATZ (sorry Stephen). my feelings were that they are coming out with better, less ambigous timezone names such as PDT8PST and MET-1DST (the two that are close to my heart), although the ATZ implementations i've seen seem to use the older, shorter, ambiguous terms. thus, my question is this: should we modify the FAQ text on ATZ as per above, or modify the sources to use better timezone names? secondly, you've all just read about mr. johnson's experience with LOCKF. was this a singular experience, or is this true on everybody's sun? should the FAQ be amended to include the following: Bottom line is that I believe that the FAQ is wrong, and that at least on SunOS one should *not* define LOCKF and should use LOK_BELL instead. So, I recommend in mtstailor: lockstyle: 1 yer 'umble servant, -- --bw ----- Bill Wohler Heidelberg Red Barons Ultimate Frisbee Team