times off by one hour

[Andrew Tridgell]

> My Samba Servers are running on Solaris 2.6. I doubt it are the
> timezone files. Furthermore, I just switched the date on my NT-Box to
> be outside the DST-period, and the time difference got worse, now being
> two hours ...

You need to send _precise_ ways to reproduce the problem. Then I can
easily fix it. By precise I mean not things like "create a file and
look at the timestamp under NT". I mean things like "create a file on
the Samba 1.9.18p8 server then match the time with the time shown by
filemanager under NT4.0SP3 when you right click and select properties
for the file and look at the last modify time".

Sorry to be so fussy. When I last chased timestamp problems I spent
ages trying to interpret vague bug reports. There are a _huge_ number
of permutations on how timestamps are handled in the SMB protocol and
often the one action (like selecting "properties") will exercise half
a dozen permutations at once. If you don't give precise instructions I
can't help.

Also note that with NT and Win95 the timestamp can change by looking
at it! Every time you do a "file/properties" the client asks for the
time then _changes_ it to the time it got back from the server, but
using a different timestamp format. So you have to view the timestamp
multiple times and see if it changes with each view (or every 2nd
view, as there are interactions between 2 second, 1 second and 100ns
resolution timestamps).

> Now, what has me completely stumped is that the dates of print jobs
> show the correct hour, but are off by a _day_. (No, I this is not just
> my imagination, you can come and look for yourself. :-) )

again, you have to say _exactly_ what tools and actions you are using
to reproduce this.
 
> Now, to help my understanding of the matter, is there an official
> definition (or ar least an official guess) what NT expects as a
> timestamp ?

There is a spec, but what NT does with timestamps is a _long_ way from
the spec. We have to be bug-compatible.