Re: Is Informix 7.24.UC5-1 free of Feb 29, 2000 bug (B60150)

Hello, I've received confirmation that the version information posted earlier this month has been overtaken by events, and a new list of Y2K safe versions has been posted to the main Informix web site (http://www.informix.com/). One lesson from this is that the Y2K information may have to change over time if bugs are found unexpectedly -- keep an eye on the Y2K information page at the Informix web site. This comment came from a well-placed source in the Y2K Project Office: >The bug was not fixed properly on that platform. The GLS library was not >recompiled on some platforms because the bug was categorized incorrectly >as a genlib bug, so they are re-doing the ports. Check the webpage now. >I think it shows a newer version. Yours, Jonathan Leffler (jleffler@informix.com) #include <witticism.h> Guardian of DBD::Informix v0.60 -- http://www.perl.com/CPAN Informix IDN for D4GL & Linux -- http://www.informix.com/idn >Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 12:29:49 -0400 (EDT) >From: "]Steve Berg" <spb@masada.nb.com> >To: chuanlarp@bigfoot.com >Subject: Re: Is Informix 7.24.UC5-1 free of Feb 29, 2000 bug (Bug no. 60150). > >I am running 7.24.UC5 on a Sequent. I tried Jonathon's example and I got >the -1204 error. So I would guess it is not fixed in 7.24.UC5. > >Steve Berg >spb@nb.com > >On Wed, 9 Sep 1998, Jonathan Leffler wrote: >> On Wed, 9 Sep 1998, Chuanlarp Satchavarodom wrote: >> > My system is Informix 7.24.UC5-1. I was wondering whether it is >> > free of Bug 60150 as mentioned in the following discussion. Any >> > answers will be appreciated. Thank you very much. >> >> Since 7.25.UC5* was released after 7.24.UC4, you should be OK. >> >> You can verify that you are OK by testing what happens when you run: >> >> DBCENTURY=C DBDATE="dmy4/" dbaccess stores7 - <<! >> SELECT DATE('29/2/00') FROM SysTables WHERE tabid = 1; >> ! >> >> If you get error -1204 (Invalid year in date), then you still have B60150 >> in your code; if you don't get error -1204, then you are OK. >> >> I'm testing with 7.24.UC1; it has the bug, as documented by Cristian and June. >> >> Cristian wrote: >> > >Yes, even with DBCENTURY correctly set, the engine fails to recognize >> > >Feb 29, 2000 as a valid date. Bug no is 60150. First versions that have >> > >this bug fixed are 7.23.UC9, 7.24.UC4 and 7.30.UC1. >> > >> > June Tong wrote: >> > > Vijay R. Anisetti wrote: >> > > > I have a 7.22 installation on one machine and 7.23 on another, >> > > > both are HP boxes. I was checking the Informix documentation >> > > > regarding the Year 2000 compliance of the Informix-Online Dynamic >> > > > Server, it says the versions >=7.23.UC9,>=7.24.UC6 are >> > > > recommended. But, my 7.22.UC1 inteprets DBCENTURY value just like >> > > > the 7.23.UC5. Is there any difference between the two? Will I be >> > > > Year 2000 compliant with 7.22.UC1? >> > > >> > > Depends on what you mean by "Year 2000 compliant". All versions of >> > > OnLine are "Year 2000 compliant" in that they do not store years as >> > > 2 digits. What you get in 7.20 is support for DBCENTURY. If >> > > Informix is recommending certain versions >7.20, it's probably >> > > because of bugs in the way DBCENTURY works or interprets certain >> > > dates (I seem to recall a bug with Feb.29, 2000, and whether it was >> > > accepted as a leap year or not).