TID: FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815   
   RFC-X-No-Archive: Yes   
   TZUTC: 0100   
   CHRS: UTF-8 2   
   PID: GED+LNX 1.1.5-b20161221   
   MSGID: 2:280/464 5dd7c18b   
   REPLY: 2:280/464.47@fidonet 5dd6fbbc   
   Hi Oliver,   
      
   On 2019-11-21 20:56:36, you wrote to me:   
      
    WV>> There's also the problem that the squish message base stores   
    WV>> date/time stamps with a resolution of 2 seconds. That has been   
    WV>> causing problems in the past where a squish system forwarded messages   
    WV>> to its other links with the date/times changed from the original, and   
    WV>> so causing undetected dupes on some systems.   
      
    OT> This might be a problem with some tossers, but it's not a problem with the   
    OT> Squish specification itself. It would surprise me, if Squish didn't use   
   the   
    OT> original date for rescanned messages.   
      
    OT> Quote from the Squish Developers Kit Version 2.00:   
      
    OT>   __ftsc_date    char[20]  218  FTS-0001  compatible date.   Squish   
    OT>                                 applications should not access this   
    OT>                                 field directly.  This field is used   
    OT>                                 exclusively by tossers and scanners   
    OT>                                 for  preserving the  original ASCII   
    OT>                                 message date.   Squish applications   
    OT>                                 should  use  the  binary  dates  in   
    OT>                                 date_written  and  date_arrived  to   
    OT>                                 retrieve the message date.   
      
   Looks good (if it's used when forwarding mail).   
      
    OT> I suspect hpt from the husky project. In scanarea.c, function makeMsg:   
      
    OT>   sc_time((union stamp_combo *) &(xmsg.date_written), (char   
    OT> *)msg->datetime)   
      
   I don't remember what tosser the guilty system used, when we found out...   
      
    WV>> This is of course only a problem if you have more than 1 link to an   
    WV>> echomail area. Which is never (or shouldn't) be the case for a point   
    WV>> system. ;)   
      
    OT> I'm a node in the othernet ;)   
      
   Are you a "leaf" node, or do you have multiple links?   
      
   Bye, Wilfred.   
      
   --- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815   
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/123 15/2 18/200 90/1 103/705 203/0 221/0 227/114 229/354   
   SEEN-BY: 229/426 452 1014 240/5832 249/206 317 400 280/464 5003 292/854   
   SEEN-BY: 317/3 322/757 342/200 396/45 423/120 633/280 712/848 770/1   
   SEEN-BY: 2452/250   
   PATH: 280/464 229/426