From: glen mccready 
  To: 0xdeadbeef@substance.abuse.blackdown.org
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 15:05:05 -0500

Forwarded-by: Nev Dull <nev@bostic.com>
Forwarded-by: guy@netapp.com (Guy Harris)

From: cbbrowne@news.hex.net (Christopher Browne)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Y2K bug - Feb 29 2000 broken under Linux

Date: 23 Mar 1998 02:21:46 GMT
Organization: Hex.Net Superhighway, DFW Metroplex 817-329-3182
Message-ID: <6f4gvq$q4f$4@blue.hex.net>

On Sun, 22 Mar 1998 20:29:48 +0200, Graham Leggett <graham@vwv.com> wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>To my knowledge, the year 2000 is NOT a leap year. (Can anyone confirm
>this)
>
>As it stands, at midnight on Feb 28, 2000 the clock ticks over to Feb
>29, instead of March 1:
>
>[root@samantha /root]# date
>Mon Feb 28 23:59:52 SAT 2000
>[root@samantha /root]# date
>Mon Feb 28 23:59:57 SAT 2000
>[root@samantha /root]# date
>Tue Feb 29 00:00:01 SAT 2000
>[root@samantha /root]# date
>Tue Feb 29 00:00:06 SAT 2000
>
>(The same problem exists in Solaris v2.5.1, and in Windows 95).
>
>Anyone care to confirm:
>
>a) if this a bug or not, or
>b) if someone is gonna fix this.

This is not a bug.

The "official" Papal declaration on leap years by Pope Gregory is entitled
<bf>Inter Gravissimas</bf> and reads something like the following:

"9. Deinde, ne in posterum a XII kalendas aprilis aequinoctium recedat,
statuimus bissextum quarto quoque anno (uti mos est) continuari debere,
praeterquam in centesimis annis; qui, quamvis bissextiles antea semper
fuerint, qualem etiam esse volumus annum MDC, post eum tamen qui deinceps
consequentur centesimi non omnes bissextiles sint, sed in quadringentis
quibusque annis primi quique tres centesimi sine bissexto transigantur,
quartus vero quisque centesimus bissextilis sit, ita ut annus MDCC, MDCCC,
MDCCCC bissextiles non sint. Anno vero MM, more consueto dies bissextus
intercaletur, februario dies XXIX continente, idemque ordo intermittendi
intercalandique bissextum diem in quadringentis quibusque annis perpetuo
conservetur."

The upshot of this is that in the Gregorian calendar, which is now
pretty much in universal use, 2000 *IS* a leap year.  That appears to be
what the last sentence indicates.

If you are still unclear on this, I suggest that you examine the sources
to any of the versions of "cal." The GNU version, GCAL, documents things
fairly nicely.
-- 
"If the future navigation system [for interactive networked services on
the NII] looks like something from Microsoft, it will never work."
(Chairman of Walt Disney Television & Telecommunications) 
cbbrowne@hex.net -  <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>