Tzdata2006b.tar.gz, tz32code2006b.tar.gz, and tz64code2006b.tar.gz

[Olson, Arthur David (NIH/NCI) [E]]

If we don't see reports of problems with the new stuff, I'll be happy to
go with tzcode2006c.tar.gz rather than tz64code2006c.tar.gz on the next
iteration; I wasn't inclined to be so prejudicial this time around. The
question then becomes whether to change the name tz32code206b.tar.gz.
Perhaps old-tzcode-32-bit-outputx.tar.gz would do the trick?

				--ado 

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Eggert [mailto:eggert at cs.ucla.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 4:06 PM
To: tz at lecserver.nci.nih.gov
Subject: Re: Tzdata2006b.tar.gz, tz32code2006b.tar.gz, and
tz64code2006b.tar.gz

"Olson, Arthur David \(NIH/NCI\) [E]" <olsona at dc37a.nci.nih.gov> writes:

> 	ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/tzdata2006b.tar.gz
> 	ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/tz32code2006b.tar.gz
> 	ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/tz64code2006b.tar.gz
>
> The 32-bit code is there for folks who may need it; with providence, 
> there will be little or no need to update it.

This means we'll need to update the instructions in tz-link.htm, which
currently say this:

  wget 'ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/tz*.tar.gz'
  gzip -dc tzcode*.tar.gz | tar -xf -
  gzip -dc tzdata*.tar.gz | tar -xf -

and this won't work nicely, due to the two code tarballs overridding
each other.

The names tz32code2006b.tar.gz and tz64code2006b.tar.gz are a bit
confusing, since people might naturally get confused into thinking that
the tarballs are for 32-bit and 64-bit development platforms, or for
32-bit and 64-bit runtime platforms, whereas neither is the case:
they are really for 32-bit and 64-bit tz files, which is a different
matter.

Here's an idea.  How about if we rename tz32code2006b.tar.gz to
pre2038-tzcode2006b.tar.gz, and rename tz64code2006b.tar.gz back to
tzcode2006b.tar.gz?  That way, I won't have to change tz-link.htm (so
it's less work for me :-), and also, users will be able to see more
clearly why one might prefer the current to the previous version.
Also, this naming convention fits in better with the recently-removed
'classictzcode' and 'classictzdata' convention.

If you still prefer the current naming style, please let me know, so
that I can propose a patch to tz-link.htm.  Thanks.