Am I the only one whose bobo_modification_time started today with /2000/2/29 instead of /2000/03/01? I create a new method Time_now: <dtml-var ZopeTime><br> <dtml-var bobobase_modification_time--> and the Output is: 2000/03/01 18:30:21.091 GMT+1 2000/02/29 18:30:5.198 GMT+1 Same appears in my Undo Log (February, 29th started again today) and so on. TIA, Thomas -- fon: ++49 (0)40 42878 3781 fax: ++49 (0)40 42878 2728
From: "Thomas Weiner" <weiner@tu-harburg.de>
Am I the only one whose bobo_modification_time started today with /2000/2/29 instead of /2000/03/01?
I create a new method Time_now:
<dtml-var ZopeTime><br> <dtml-var bobobase_modification_time-->
and the Output is:
2000/03/01 18:30:21.091 GMT+1 2000/02/29 18:30:5.198 GMT+1
Same appears in my Undo Log (February, 29th started again today) and so on.
1: What is your timezone setting. It could be that dates are displayed in a different timezone. 2: If you do your test from a DTML Method, you'll be shown the modification date of the container it is called on. For an explanation, see: http://www.zope.org/Members/michel/HowTos/DTMLMethodsandDocsHowTo and other How-To's on DTML and Aqcuisition. Martijn Pieters | Software Engineer mailto:mj@digicool.com | Digital Creations http://www.digicool.com/ | Creators of Zope http://www.zope.org/ | The Open Source Web Application Server ---------------------------------------------
<color><param>0100,0100,0100</param>On 1 Mar 00, 21:42 Martijn Pieters wrote: <color><param>7F00,0000,0000</param>> From: "Thomas Weiner" <<weiner@tu-harburg.de>
Am I the only one whose bobo_modification_time started today with
/2000/2/29 instead of /2000/03/01?
I create a new method Time_now:
<<dtml-var ZopeTime><<br>
<<dtml-var bobobase_modification_time-->
and the Output is:
2000/03/01 18:30:21.091 GMT+1
2000/02/29 18:30:5.198 GMT+1
Same appears in my Undo Log (February, 29th started again today) and
so on.
1: What is your timezone setting. It could be that dates are displayed
in a different timezone.
</color>As it says. GMT+1, obviously <color><param>7F00,0000,0000</param>> 2: If you do your test from a DTML Method, you'll be shown the
modification date of the container it is called on. For an
explanation, see:
</color>> <color><param>7F00,0000,0000</param>> http://www.zope.org/Members/michel/HowTos/DTMLMethodsandDocsHowTo </color>That remark is misleading, as a simple experiment could have shown easily :-( dtml-var standard_html_header> <<h2><<dtml-var title_or_id><</h2> <<p> This is the <<dtml-var id> Document. <</p> <<dtml-var ZopeTime><<br> <<dtml-var bobobase_modification_time> <<br> <<dtml-var "_.DateTime(_.DateTime().timeTime())"><<br> <<dtml-var standard_html_footer><color><param>7F00,0000,0000</param> </color>renders as <bold><color><param>0100,0100,0100</param><FontFamily><param>Times New Roman</param><bigger><bigger><bigger><bigger>y2bug </bold><smaller><smaller><smaller>This is the y2kbug Document. 2000/03/02 13:22:14.766 GMT+1 2000/03/01 13:22:13.565 GMT+1 2000/03/02 13:22:14.766 GMT+1 </color><FontFamily><param>Arial</param><smaller>when I use "change" and "view" in succession, on that document. <nofill> -- o ( Wolfgang.Strobl@gmd.de (+49 2241) 14-2394 /\ * GMD mbH #include _`\ `_<=== Schloss Birlinghoven, <std.disclaimer> __(_)/_(_)___.-._ 53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany ________________
Function TimeStamp_yad(int y) in zope-2.1.4-src\lib\python\zodb\TimeStamp.c expects a 1900 based year (i.e. 0 = 1900, 2000=100, etc.), for positive agruments, when computing (y+300)/400. TimeStamp_abst(int y, int mo, int d, int m, int s) seems to expect a 0 based year, on the other hand. l = y%4==0 && (y%100 != 0 || y%400==0) But it gets called with a 1900 based year in line 290 in function TimeStamp_timeTime( TimeStamp_abst(TimeStamp_y-1900, TimeStamp_m- 1, TimeStamp_d-1, -- o ( Wolfgang.Strobl@gmd.de (+49 2241) 14-2394 /\ * GMD mbH #include _`\ `_<=== Schloss Birlinghoven, <std.disclaimer> __(_)/_(_)___.-._ 53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany ________________
Thomas Weiner wrote:
Am I the only one whose bobo_modification_time started today with /2000/2/29 instead of /2000/03/01?
I only noticed it today (2000/03/02): the undo logs show 2000/03/01, and so do ZWiki times. This appears to be a bug in bobobase_modification_time. <dtml-var "_.DateTime()"> does show the right time, and the 'Content changed' notification Zope gives does too. The bug happens on both Windows NT and Linux. Regards, Martijn
Martijn Faassen schrieb:
Thomas Weiner wrote:
Am I the only one whose bobo_modification_time started today with /2000/2/29 instead of /2000/03/01?
I only noticed it today (2000/03/02): the undo logs show 2000/03/01, and so do ZWiki times. This appears to be a bug in bobobase_modification_time.
I've put this into the collector, the bug is a bit weird for those, who use bobobase_modification_time quite heavy, like me :)
<dtml-var "_.DateTime()"> does show the right time, and the 'Content changed' notification Zope gives does too. The bug happens on both Windows NT and Linux.
aah .. the 'content changed' is a bit irritating, but it's only the notice 'content changed' and a <dtml-var DateTime> in the next line. Thanks, Thomas
participants (4)
-
Martijn Faassen -
Martijn Pieters -
Thomas Weiner -
Wolfgang Strobl