GNU Operating System and Year 2000 Problems

Table of Contents

• Information about this list
• Software which has passed the Year 2000 checks
• Software which might be okay
• Software which is NOT OK
• Software which has not yet been checked

Information about this list

This description of the Y2K readiness of GNU Operating System packages is a Year 2000 Readiness Disclosure as defined in the Year 2000 Information and Readiness Disclosure Act. This description of our software compliance is for informational purposes only. It does not constitute a guaranty, warranty, representation, or contract of any sort between you and the FSF or other copyright holders of these packages. Under no circumstance will the copyright holders of these packages or the FSF be liable to you for any damages or claims based upon the information contained herein.

The information given below has been provided by Koos Schut working as a volunteer. The FSF is not the source of the information and has not verified or tested the accuracy of the evaluations; all the information has been brought here from Koos Schut's Y2K web page with his help.

To make this list more useful, two things are very welcome. First: if you have any year-2000 information of GNU Operating System packages of which the year-2000 status is not known in this list, please share it with Koos Schut. Second: if you have independently-derived year-2000 information, please share that with Koos Schut, too, since two different checks are much more reliable than one.

There is no year-2000 information available on packages which are not mentioned in this list.

Software which has passed the Year 2000 checks

• acct-6.3 (OK)
  Uses 4-digit year
• ae (OK)
  No suspect strings in sources
• aegis (OK)
  Lots of correct year manipulation
• apache-1.3 (OK)
  Claimed to be okay by the authors
• apache-1.3.3 (OK)
  Passed Y2K tests
• autoconf-2.10 (OK)
  No suspect strings in sources
• autoconf-2.12 (OK)
  No suspect strings in sources
• automake-1.0 (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• automake-1.2 (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• automake-1.4 (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• bash-2.02 (OK)
  Uses ctime for prompt only
• bc-1.05 (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• bison-1.24 (OK)
  No suspect strings in sources
• bison-1.25 (OK)
  No suspect strings in sources
• bison-1.27 (OK)
  No suspect strings in sources
• button-14.0 (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• calc-2.02f (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• cfengine-1.4.12 (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• clisp-1997.09.25 (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• clx-5.02 (OK)
  LISP files
• cook-2.4 (OK)
  4-digit years
• cperf-2.1a (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• cvs-1.10 (OK last update 19991217)
  Claimed OK, passed Y2K tests
• ddd-2.0 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• dejagnu-1.3 (OK)
  Correct use of tm_year
• diffutils-2.7 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• dirent (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• dld-3.3 (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• doschk-1.1 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• ed-0.2 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• elib-1.0 (OK)
  Only elisp functions which does no date manipulation
• emacs-20.3 (OK)
  Passed Y2K tests
• enscript-1.6.1 (OK)
  This update fixed the various year2000 problems
• es-0.9alpha1 (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• f2c (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• findutils-4.1 (OK)
  Can do 4-digit years
• finger-1.37 (OK)
  Does simple date manipulation
• flex-2.5.2 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• flex-2.5.4a (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• fontutils-0.6 (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• gawk-3.0.0 (OK)
  Can do 4-digit years
• g++-2.5.0 (OK)
  Does simple date-manipulation with tm_year
• gcc-2.7.2 (OK)
• gcc-2.7.2.1 (OK)
• gcc-2.7.2.2 (OK)
• gcc-2.8.0 (OK)
  No Year2000 problems found
• gcc-2.8.1 (OK)
  Passed Y2K tests

  Tested for date-rollover to 2000-01-01 and 2000-02-29

• gcl-2.2.2 (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• gdbm-1.7.3 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code, passed Y2K tests
• gettext-0.10 (OK)
  Uses tm_year correctly
• gforth-0.3.0 (OK)
  Uses tm_year + 1900 correctly
• gforth-0.4.0 (OK)
  Uses tm_year + 1900 correctly
• ghostscript-5.10 (OK last update 19991217)
  Passed Y2K tests
• ghostview-1.5 (OK)
  Passed Y2K tests
• git-4.3.17 (OK)
  Correct tm_year usage
• glibc-crypt-2.0.6 (OK)
  No date-manipulation
• glibc-linuxthreads-2.0.6 (OK)
  No date-manipulation
• glibc-localdata-2.0.6 (OK)
  No date-manipulation
• gmp-2.0.2 (OK)
  No date-manipulation
• gnans (OK)
  Makes no assumption of year < 2000
• gnuchess-4.0pl79 (OK)
  No date-manipulation
• gnulogo-1.2 (OK)
  No date-manipulation
• gnuplot-3.5 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• gnushlogi-1.2p03 (OK)
  No date-manipulation
• gnussl-0.2.1 (OK)
  No date-manipulation
• gperf-2.7 (OK)
  No date-manipulation
• grep-2.0 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• grep-2.1 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• groff-1.12 (OK last update 19991217)
  Y2k fixed.
• gst-115 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• gstep-core (OK)
  Correct usage of tm_year
• guile-1.2 (OK)
  Correct usage of tm_year
• guile-1.3 (OK)
  Correct usage of tm_year, passed Y2K tests
• gzip-1.2.4a OK
  Hardly any date-manipulation
• gzip-1.2.4 (OK last update 19991217)
  Difference with 1.2.4a is an email address, only, and it has passed Y2K tests
• hello-1.3 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• hp2xx-3.1.4 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• hurd-0.2 (OK)
  Some date manipulation, but alls seems okay
• hyperbole-4.01 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• id-utils-3.2 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• indent-1.9.1 (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• intlfonts-1.1
  No code with date manipulation
• ispell-3.1.20 (OK)
  No suspect strings in sourc code
• less-3.3.2 (OK)
  No suspect strings in sourc code, passed Y2K tests
• libobjects-0.1.19 (OK)
  Correct usage of tm_year
• libtool-1.2 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• lilypond-1.0.17 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• m4-1.4 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• malloc-? (OK)
  Doesn't do any date manipulation
• maxima-5.2 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• mcsim-4.2.0 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• miscfiles-1.1 (OK)
  No source code with date manipulation
• mm-1.07 (OK)
  Appears to be okay
• motti-1.0 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• mtools-3.8 (OK)
  Is tested: see http://www.tux.org/pub/tux/knaff/mtools/y2k.html (archived)
• netpbm-9403 (OK)
  No suspect strings in sourc code
• nethack-3.2.3 (OK last update 19991217)
  OK according http://www.nethack.org/v330/info.html#Y2K
• nethack-3.3 (OK last update 19991217)
  OK according http://www.nethack.org/v330/info.html#Y2K
• octave-2.0.13 (OK)
  Claimed to be OK
• para-0.27 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• patch-2.1 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• patch-2.5 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• perl-5.002_solaris (OK)
  Passed Y2K tests
• perl-5.004_04 (OK)
  Claimed to be OK, passed Y2K tests
• perl-5.005_02 (OK)
  Claimed to be OK passed Y2K tests
• perl-5.005_03 (OK)
  Claimed to be OK
• perl-5.005_04 (OK)
  Claimed to be OK
• pips-1.01 (OK)
  Uses 4-digit year
• ptx-0.4 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• rcs-5.5 (OK)
  Didn't find any year2000 bugs
• rcs-5.7 (OK)
  Didn't find any year2000 bugs
• samba-1.9.18p10 (OK last update 19991217)
  OK according http://www.us1.samba.org/samba/samba/docs/sambay2k.html (outdated)
• screen-3.7.2 (OK)
  Checked
• sed-2.0.5 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• sed-3.01 (OK)
  No date manipulation
• sharutils-4.2.1 (OK 1999-10-25)
  Fixes the version-4.2 problems

  Tests the remote's touch command for a way to specify 20xx timestamps

• sh-utils-1.16 (OK)
  Thoroughly studied for year2000 bugs
• smalltalk-1.1.6 (OK)
  Is OK as of from version 1.5.beta2
• stooop-3.0.1 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• sudo-1.5 OK
  OK according http://www.courtesan.com/sudo
• texinfo-3.12 OK
  Uses tm_year correctly
• time-1.7 OK
  Very little date-manipulation
• textutils-1.19 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• textutils-1.22 (OK)
  No suspect strings in source code
• xaos-3.0 OK
  No date-manipulation
• xboard-4.0.2 OK
  Correct usage of tm_year + 1900
• xemacs-21.0 OK
  Claimed at http://www.xemacs.org/year2000.html (outdated)
• xinfo-1.01.01 OK
  No date-manipulation
• xlogmaster-1.6.0 OK
  No date-manipulation
• xshogi-1.2p03 OK
  No year-manipulation
• zlibc-0.9e OK
  No date-manipulation

Software which might be okay

• R-0.64.7 (??)
  Claimed at http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/R/doc/FAQ/R-FAQ.html (outdated)
• andrew-toolkit-5.0.0 (??)
  Lots of date manupulation
• binutils-2.9.1 (??)
  Correct tm_year + 1900, awful lot of date-like code, tested for date-rollover to 2000-01-01 and 2000-02-29.
• cpio-2.4.2 (OK?)
  Uses some date manipulation, but appears okay
• emacs-20.2 (OK?)
  Lots of potential Year2000 problems, but seems mosly okay
• fileutils-3.16 (OK?)
  Lots of potential year2000 problems, but appears mostly okay
• fileutils-4.0 (OK?)
  Lots of potential year2000 problems, but appears mostly okay
• gawk-3.0.3 (OK?)
  Lots of tm_year manipulation, but appears okay
• gcal-2.40
  Awful lot of year manipulation
• glibc-2.0.6 (OK?)
  Lots of year manipulation, but appears mostly okay
• libg++-2.8.0 (OK?)
  Lots of potential year2000 code, but appears okay
• libstdc++-2.8.0 (OK?)
  Lots of potential year2000 code, but appears okay
• lynx-2.8
  Lots of strange year manipulation
• make-3.77
  Lots of potential year2000 code, but appears okay, tested for date-rollover to 2000-01-01 and 2000-02-29.
• make-3.76.1 (OK?)
  Lots of potential year2000 code, but appears okay
• mc-4.1 (OK?)
  Lots of year manipulation
• oleo-1.6 (OK?)
  Lot of year manipulation....is inconsistent about leap years. Problem will not appear in 2000 (might in 2400)
• pcl-gcl-2.1 (OK?)
  Lisp code, no date manipulation
• tar-1.12 (OK?)
  Lots of potential Year2000 code, but appears okay
• wget-1.5.3 (OK?)
  Lots of potential Year2000 code, but appears okay

Software which is NOT OK

• cvs-1.8
  Claimed to have problems
• cvs-1.9
  Claimed to have problems
• dgs-0.5.0 NOT OK
  Mostly okay, but is having trouble in the ras2tif code
• ecc NOT OK
  Not OK for other reasons
• elm-2.4 NOT OK
  Did not pass Y2K tests
• enscript-1.4.0 NOT OK
  Assumes run_tm.tm_year to have two digits
• enscript-1.5.0 NOT OK
  Assumes run_tm.tm_year to have two digits
• exim-2.02 NOT OK
  Assumes years to be between 1990 and 2090
• g77-0.5.23 NOT OK
  Correct usage of tm_year. However, the IDATE (VXT) intrinsic returns a two-digit year. In 2000 it is supposed to return 0, but will return 100 instead. Programs printing that number as a two-digit field might therefore print "**" instead of "00", "01", etc. Version 0.5.24 will fix this, and it is already fixed in the egcs-1.1.2 version.
• gnats-3.2 NOT OK
  Uses some strange date manipulation in getdate.c
• gnumach-1.1.3 NOT OK
  Strange date manipulations
• groff-1.11a NOT-OK (last update 19991217)
  Did not pass Y2K tests (common *roff family). These are rather harmless.
• inetutils-1.3b NOT-OK
  Replies to the ftp client with a 2 year date
• metahtml-5.09 NOT-OK
  Did not pass Y2K tests (heavy repairs required)
• perl-4.036 NOT-OK (last update 19991217)
  Newer version is claimed OK
• sharutils-4.2 NOT-OK (1999-10-29)
  Prints %2d, tm_year in shar.c, fixed in version 4.2.1
• smalltalk-1.1.5 NOT-OK
  uses 31 bit signed int which overflows in 2004
• nethack-3.2.2 NOT-OK (last update 19991217)
  writes records in %02d%02d%02d", lt->tm_year ... format
• tar-1.11.8 NOT-OK (last update 20000118)
  The following will work OK:
  tar -czf dest.tgz --newer-mtime=Jan5,1999 sources
  The following will not work OK:
  tar -czf dest.tgz --newer-mtime=Jan5,2000 sources
  tar: Invalid date-format 'Jan5,2000'
• tiff-3.4b035 NOT-OK
  Assumes 19xx years
• tiff-3.4b037 NOT-OK
  Assumes 19xx years
• X11R6 NOT-OK (last update 19991217)
  Did not pass Y2K tests

  xc/doc/specs/PEX5/SI/pex.macros

  Something here produces the year 19100. There is a patch which involves some cryptic typing for me (receiving patches in Windhoos-mail and trying to get them past firewalls and things does not seem to work).

Software which has not yet been checked

• acm
• automake-1.3
  Newer version is tested OK
• cxref
• dclshar
• djgpp
• dumb
• elisp
• emacs-19.29
  Newer version is OK
• emacs-20.0
  Newer version is OK
• emacs-lisp-intro
• ffcall
• fileutils-3.13
  Newer version is probably OK
• flexfax
• gamma
• gas
• gcc-vms
• gdb-4.16
  Too much date-like code for me to decide
• gdb-4.17
  Too much date-like code for me to decide
• generic-NQS
• geomview
• ghostscript-4.03
  Very obfuscated code, newer version is OK
• ghostview
• gimp
• gnat
  Theoretically OK (There is a commercial claim)
• gnuserv
• gpc
• grep-2.2
  Older version is OK
• groff-1.10
  No suspect strings in source code, *roff family has Y2K problems, newer version 1.11 is NOT-OK!
• guavac
• jarg400
• jargon
• karma
• leim
• lesstif
• libg++-2.7.1
  Newer version probably OK
• libg++-2.7.2
  Newer version probably OK
• libg++-2.8.1.1a
  Older version probably OK
• libstdc++-2.8.1
  Older version probably OK
• lily
• lout
• lpf
• makeinfo
• mandelspawn
• mkid
• mkisofs
• mule
• mutt
• nana
• net2-bsd
• netfax
• nihcl
• nvi
• oaklisp
• objective-c
• obst
• oops
• p2c
• pcl-gcl
• perl-5.002
  Newer version is claimed OK
• perl-5.003
  Newer version is claimed OK
• perlref
• phttpd
• plotutils
• prcs
• rc
• readline
• recode
• regex
• rsync
• rx
• saoimage
• scheme
• scm
• sh-utils-1.12
  Newer version is tested OK
• sipp
• smail
• sneps
• spell
• spinner
• superopt
• swarm
• termcap
• termutils
• tex
• texinfo-3.7
  Newer version is tested OK
• texinfo-3.9
  Newer version is tested OK
• tile-forth
• ucblogo
• units
• uucp
• uuencode
• vera
• vm
• w3
• wdiff
• wget-1.5.1
  Newer version is tested as probably OK
• winboard
• windows32api
• wn
• xboard-3.6.2
  Newer version is tested OK
• xgrabsc
• xxgdb
• yale-T
• ygl