| From: | Olaf Barthel |
| Date: | 24 Dec 99 at 09:35:32 |
| Subject: | Re: AW: Re: Version String, CPU detection |
From: "Olaf Barthel" <olsen-amigac@sourcery.han.de>
On Dec 23 Fritsch (Fritsch Alexander) wrote:
> From: Fritsch Alexander <Alexander.Fritsch@icn.siemens.de>
>
> Thanks to all for the replies.
> I will of course use the format from the style guide.
>
> According to my tests and your suggestions my fault was the 4-digit-year.
> (19.12.1999). If I use only (19.12.99) all works fine. But what should I do
> next year? Should I use 00? Do we have a Y2K-problem here? (I think of
> discriminating newer versions from older)
Yes, there is a Y2K problem with the "Version" command. As I wrote, it
adds 1900+<year number> to calculate the actual year number. Thus, "00" would
be just as wrong as "2000", see?