= Сообщение: 508 из 7402 ============================================== IPV6 = От : Wilfred van Velzen 2:280/464 20 Mar 14 18:28:09 Кому : Björn Felten 20 Mar 14 18:28:09 Тема : Re: Time warp? FGHI : area://IPV6?msgid=2:280/464+532b2660 На : area://IPV6?msgid=2:203/2+532b110c = Кодировка сообщения определена как: CP437 ================================== Ответ: area://IPV6?msgid=3:640/384+17d70972 ============================================================================== Hi Björn,
On 2014-03-20 17:02:21, you wrote to me:
BF> More on this strange issue (from the info page that Michiel pointed me BF> to):
BF> Most compilers under DOS-derived systems return local time as a value of BF> time(). Even worse, this value is inconsistent from one compiler to another BF> and from one library to another, so that it's quite possible that binkd and BF> some T-Mail log analyser will be using different implementations of time() BF> and output inconsistent timing.
BF> tzoff keyword provides a workaround for this bug. You can specify an BF> arbitrary time offset (in seconds) in order to force both programs to give BF> same time values. This keyword affects time offset for binary logging only BF> specified by binlog and/or fdinhist and fdouthist.
I don't think this option has anything to do with the issue this thread is about.
Both my linux binkd and Michiel's windows binkd report the time correctly to you as derived from your logs. But the time reported by argus to other systems is wrongly fomatted. It seems to report UTC instead of local time, but it also specifies a time offset other then +0000 (which would be correct for UTC).
Is the source code for Argus available? Someone should check in there if he wants to get to the bottom of this. I don't think it's worth the trouble for just a cosmetic problem...
