After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 223466 - Printed calendar for May 1996 is off by one day.
Printed calendar for May 1996 is off by one day.
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Calendar
unspecified
Other All
: Normal critical
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-calendar-maintainers
Evolution QA team
: 237319 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2002-04-16 03:11 UTC by kern
Modified: 2013-09-10 14:02 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Description kern 2002-04-16 03:11:58 UTC 
Package: Evolution
Priority: Critical
Version: 1.0.3.99
Synopsis: Printed calendar for May 1996 is off by one day.
Bugzilla-Product: Evolution
Bugzilla-Component: Calendar

Description:
Dispalying a monthly calendar for May 1996 on the screen is correct.
However, when it is printed, each day is shifted one day earlier in the
week. Thus in the printed output, the 24th of May 1996 is listed as
being
a Thursday when it was actually a Friday.

Current (2002) calendars seem to print correctly.
Comment 1 Damon Chaplin 2002-04-16 17:36:40 UTC 
Oh dear, it looks like a bad leap-year bug.

If you print the calendar for the entire year 1996 the last day of
January is on Wed, but the first day of February is on Fri.
And there's a similar problem Feb->March.

Fortunately it seems to be only a problem when printing, not in the
calendar itself.
Comment 2 Gerardo Marin 2002-06-04 20:48:44 UTC 
Still alive in 1.1.0.99
Comment 3 Gerardo Marin 2002-07-03 20:33:23 UTC 
Guys: printed calendars are not usable if they're shifted one day in 
leap years.
While there's still a while to the next leap, this sounds pretty 
nasty.
Setting tentative milestone to 1.2, please feel free to move it.
Comment 4 JP Rosevear 2002-07-24 17:08:12 UTC 
Ok, figured out what this was.  Committed to 1.1.x.  Patch pending for
1.0.x approval.
Comment 5 JP Rosevear 2002-07-24 17:36:40 UTC 
Closing since it doesn't need to be backported.
Comment 6 Gerardo Marin 2003-01-29 17:20:19 UTC 
*** bug 237319 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***