Re: tzdata2006n Brazil incorrect fall-back date 2009-mar-01
"Dave O'Callaghan" <daveoc@uk.ibm.com> writes:
I have been alerted to this website http://icu-project.org/trac/ticket/5470 which describes an issue with the Brazil update in tzdata2006n.
Is this true?
It appears to me to be a problem in the ICU4C's code simpletz.cpp, not in the tz code or data itself, so you should ask whoever wrote simpletz.cpp to fix it. The tz data currently says that the fall-back transition in Brazil in 2009 is the last Sunday in February, which will be 2009-02-22, but the ICU4C (?) code apparently does not handle this case correctly. To some extent this is all academic. Judging by past experience, Brazil most likely will change the rules before 2009 rolls around, so the tz data is just guessing about the 2009 transition.
Dear Dave et al., I reported and subsequently fixed the bug. If you are curious, you can click on the SVN Diffs link near the top of the bug report to see what changed. For questions about using ICU, bugs, support etc. please use the icu-support mailing list: http://icu.sourceforge.net/contacts.html Best regards, markus On 1/22/07, Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
"Dave O'Callaghan" <daveoc@uk.ibm.com> writes:
I have been alerted to this website http://icu-project.org/trac/ticket/5470 which describes an issue with the Brazil update in tzdata2006n.
Is this true?
It appears to me to be a problem in the ICU4C's code simpletz.cpp, not in the tz code or data itself, so you should ask whoever wrote simpletz.cpp to fix it.
participants (2)
-
Markus Scherer -
Paul Eggert