[Coco] Back to os9level 2

[Rick Ulland]

Internally, OS0 stores the  year as one byte from 1900. For display, 
they just slapped a 19 in front of the byte value. '19' + 100 comes 
right after '19' + 99 so without patching, the date looks horked. But 
the internal value works for another 150 odd years.

-ricku
CoNect



On 4/27/20 4:57 PM, phil pt wrote:
> I do not understand what you telling me?
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 5:20 PM Alex Evans <varmfskii at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Oh, and many RTC drivers don't work properly. When crossing from 99 to
>> 100, you may go to 00 so.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 5:22 PM Alex Evans <varmfskii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Back when everyone was really concerned with Y2K, I did a test with
>>> setting the time to 99/12/31 23:59:00 and waiting. Not much of a test,
>>> but shortly we ended up at Jan, 1, 19100 :-) for the displayed time.
>>> What I do not recall is if the clock thinks 28 Feb 2000 is followed by
>>> 29 Feb or 1 Mar (does it handle leap year properly for the year 100).
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 4:26 PM phil pt <ptaylor2446 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I was just going to test it using the Burk & Burk zclock to see if it
>> wors.
>>>> <
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon
>>>> Virus-free.
>>>> www.avast.com
>>>> <
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link
>>>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 2:51 PM Alex Evans <varmfskii at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>> It isn't the actual clock that needs patching. The clock stores the
>>>>> year as a full it 8-bit value for the years since 1900. It is the
>>>>> utilities that use the clock that had to be patched.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 2:29 PM phil pt <ptaylor2446 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>> Is there any patch to the clock on the old os9 level 2 so the date
>> would
>>>>>> work as yyyy/mm/dd Hr:mm:ss?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon
>>>>>> Virus-free.
>>>>>> www.avast.com
>>>>>> <
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link
>>>>>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Coco mailing list
>>>>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>>>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>>>> --
>>>>> Coco mailing list
>>>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Coco mailing list
>>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>> --
>> Coco mailing list
>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>