Bug 19496 - 1 hour off in some DST time conversions
1 hour off in some DST time conversions
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: sh-utils (Show other bugs)
6.1
i386 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: bero
David Lawrence
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2000-10-20 18:49 EDT by Larry Stephan
Modified: 2007-04-18 12:29 EDT (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2000-10-21 07:44:54 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Larry Stephan 2000-10-20 18:49:25 EDT
date -d '1/1/70 UTC +86400000 seconds'  -- or any number of seconds that
results
in a date during daylight savings time -- returns a time one hour later
than it should.
The example returns 'Tue Sep 26 21:00:00 EDT 1972', the correct answer is
at 20:00,
which corresponds to 00:00 UTC.  (86400000 seconds is exactly 1000 days). 
For
date expressions that result in EST, the answer is correct.  In other
words, EST and EDT
are reported 2 hours apart, not one hour.  This problem may not be in date,
but somewhere else: I compiled date from gnu sources, and had the same
problem.  Note that if using EST and not UTC for a starting point, the
problem does not appear.  Also note that I'm doing this while EDT is in
effect.  Compiling gnu date (same version) on AIX did not show the
problem.  I have used both mktime() and localtime() in these time ranges
and am pretty sure I saw no problem.  This problem also appeared in RH 5.1
when I compiled gnu date (sh-utils-1.16, again from gnu sources).  As I
recall, the delivered date program in 5.1 was seriously buggy, but I may be
thinking of an earlier version.  As I find your site a bit confusing, you
may already know about this, I apologise if I have missed it as I checked.
Comment 1 Bernhard Rosenkraenzer 2001-03-06 08:47:26 EST
This is fixed in the current version.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.