mr slim
Over a year ago, I started the following topic to point out a date error in remote windows that are on ftp servers that don't include the year in time stamp raw data:
https://www.smartftp.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6471
The bug occurred when I, residing in a place with PST, upload to a server with a later time zone, GMT, in this case. There's an 8 hour difference. So if I uploaded a file after 16:00, it was already the next day on the server. The bug was that the remote window would display a time stamp for that file as being of the same day in my time zone. In other words, 24 hours earlier than it actually was on the server. Check the above link for further detail both from me and you.
Happily, you fixed the problem. Now that it's the eve of a new year (and already a new one in many places, Happy New Year, everyone!) I've discovered one other place where the same problem exists.
If I ftp a file to the server now, my remote window displays the proper date on the server, 1/1, but the year is posted as 2004, not 2005. It's the same problem as before exactly, except that the year issue wasn't rectified for the one day where it matters.
Granted, this is not a show stopper, but it would be nice to have it fixed.
https://www.smartftp.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6471
The bug occurred when I, residing in a place with PST, upload to a server with a later time zone, GMT, in this case. There's an 8 hour difference. So if I uploaded a file after 16:00, it was already the next day on the server. The bug was that the remote window would display a time stamp for that file as being of the same day in my time zone. In other words, 24 hours earlier than it actually was on the server. Check the above link for further detail both from me and you.
Happily, you fixed the problem. Now that it's the eve of a new year (and already a new one in many places, Happy New Year, everyone!) I've discovered one other place where the same problem exists.
If I ftp a file to the server now, my remote window displays the proper date on the server, 1/1, but the year is posted as 2004, not 2005. It's the same problem as before exactly, except that the year issue wasn't rectified for the one day where it matters.
Granted, this is not a show stopper, but it would be nice to have it fixed.