Re: Squid and the Year 2000

In article <199803280726.TAA12463@bats.mcs.vuw.ac.nz> you write:

>Our IT group has recently been catching up on it's buzzword quota
>and attempting to determine which mission-critical network infra-
>structure elements are Year 2000 compliant, and for those that aren't,

Sounds familiar :-(.

>who to point the figure at. Hard questions have been asked about
>Squid, mainly because there is no-one to point the finger at if it
>does break, so said finger has been pointed at me.
>
>Has anyone taken a good, serious look at Squid for Y2K compliance? My

I took a quick look some time ago and found a few problems which were fixed
in 1.1.20. One problem was in rfc1123 regarding parsing of 2-digit years:

          /* Y2K: if tm.tm_year < 70, assume it's after the year 2000 */
          if (tm.tm_year < 70)
              tm.tm_year += 100;

This will work from 1970 till 2069.

The other things were occurrances of strftime with a %y in it, which Duane
fixed by using mkrfc1123() where possible.

>Does anyone *know* of any other problems, or have had to make the case

I don't know any other problems at the moment.

>for Squid Y2K compliance to their bosses and would like to share their
>report?

I still have to this, if I find any problems you can expect the patches on
this list.

>I don't think it's worth investigating 1.1 or 1.0 for compliance; by
>the time problems would have struck you should have upgraded to
>something newer.

That's what they thought about those COBOL programs 30 years ago too :-).

Arjan
Received on Mon Mar 30 1998 - 14:02:03 MST