Understood. Not a big deal since it is a bogus kludge anyhow.
ml> TZUTC works perfectly for all who use it
Really? I've witnessed the contrary and since then have reverted back to my original hunch that all datetime stamps are likely wrong. At best extremely suspicious although I am aware of a few that are more or less accurate. Mind you that depends on how one defines accurate. What does the FTSC claim about the accuracy of their obsoleted MSG datetime stamp or haven't they documented that yet? ;-)
ml> fidonet has its own standards created and maintained for its own ml> needs
Says who? I have yet to see much evidence to support that theory. From this angle it appears to support a select few who have decided that the rest of fidonet should be in sync with their shoddy 'standards' and most of them, if indeed not all of them, have long since flown the coop. Very little of what I read in FTSC documents has anything to do with reality, nevermind standards.
Having said that I have seen some coding lately that appears to be an attempt to correct the problems. I'll take this opportunity to wish them the best and if it ever matters to support their efforts. I am currently viewing utf-8 issues in this particular light. As for the TZUTC kludge in it's current form it is totally bogus and obviously isn't worth losing any sleep over, nevermind coding anything to compensate for it's obvious flaw.
Life is good, Maurice
--- GNU bash, version 4.2.45(2)-release (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) * Origin: Pointy Stick Society - Ladysmith BC, Canada (1:153/7001.0)
