REPLY: 1:320/219@fidonet 5dc7f4f3   
   MSGID: 2:280/464.47@fidonet 5dc8047b   
   CHRS: UTF-8 4   
   TZUTC: 0100   
   TID: CrashMail II/Linux 1.7   
    AL> The file had a timestamp of 01-01-1998 on my OS/2 system;   
    AL> somehow the timestamp got grunged when I sent it over to the Linux   
    AL> machine using binkd 1.1a-99/OS2.  I just tried sending it again, and   
    AL> the same timestamp corruption occurred.   
      
   It's getting weirder ...   
      
    Ol>> now. The question is which of the two mailers doesn't handle the   
    Ol>> negative unix timestamp well.   
      
    AL> Yes, and also the 64-bit vs. 32-bit question.  I'll work on further   
    AL> testing today.   
      
   I don't see a 32-bit vs. 64-bit question at the binkp protocol level. It's   
   just an ASCII string. Fun fact: FTS-1026 uses a number in the examples that   
   cannot be encoded in 32-bit.   
      
   M_FILE "config.sys 125 2476327846 100"   
      
   2476327846 -> June 21, 2048 4:50:46 AM   
      
   --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707   
    * Origin: * nigirO (2:280/464.47)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/123 90/1 103/705 154/10 203/0 221/0 227/114 229/101 200   
   SEEN-BY: 229/354 426 1014 240/5832 249/307 317 280/464 5003 5555 292/854   
   SEEN-BY: 310/31 342/200 396/45 423/120 712/848 770/1 2452/250   
   PATH: 280/464 229/426