Re: flexfax: xferfaxlog and Y2K

[Alan Sparks <asparks@cpd.harris.com>]

I haven't had or taken the time yet to review what the script is going
to do, nothing good I suspect.  I know hylafax.org has a comment from
someone who has run the clock forward and seen faxes continue to go, so
I guess the most likely problem is reporting breaking.

My first impression is that at worst it might be necessary to flush the
xferfaxlog on Jan 1 so that all dates within are "00" dates, thinking
that at least all dates will then be monotonically increasing.

I know what you mean wrt the send and recv log runner scripts... :-O
Obviously the scripts have to be fixed in tandem with the
faxq/sendfax/sendpage programs, otherwise reporting will fall apart.

-Alan

Robert Colquhoun wrote:
> 
> Hi Alan,
> 
> At 04:48 PM 12/13/99 -0800, Alan Sparks wrote:
> >I can't find a mention of this in the archives... Is there a patch for
> >HylaFAX 4.0pl2 to fix the Y2K bug in xferfaxlog and the faxcron script?   I
> >note that the xferfaxlog BUGS section states, "The date format will
> >``break'' in the year 2000." Hmm..
> >
> >Patches?  Suggestions?  Thanks in advance.
> 
> The xferfaxlog file records the day with 2 digits for the year ie MM/DD/YY
> HH:MM
> 
> The xferfaxstats script parses it to produce a summary report....does
> xferfaxstats break if fed output where some of dates have a '00' year?
> 
> If needed i can quite easily fix it so that the faxq/faxsend output the
> date with four digits, but i am not really very keen on modifying the
> xferfaxstats awk script it is way out of control ;-)
> 
> Cutting from line 184:
> 
> #
> # Convert MM/DD/YY hh:mm to seconds.
> # NB: this does not deal with leap years.
> #
> function cvtDateTime(s)
> {
>      yday = substr(s,7,2)*365 + substr(s,4,2) - 1;
>      mon = substr(s,0,2) + 0;
>      for (i = 0; i < mon; i++)
>      yday += daysInMonth[i];
>      return yday*FULLDAY + cvtTime(substr(s,10) ":00");
> }
> 
> ...which offhand looks like it will break!
> 
> PS At worst this should just affect the fax reporting not the fax servers
> operation, i think.
> 
> - Robert