Signaled to death by 11

[Oliver Pitzeier]

Oliver Pitzeier wrote:
> Now I'll dig into tmcomp(atmp, btmp).... :-)

OK... I solved the problem... It's not OK to do it this way - I know, but it
actually helps for the moment...

--- mkgmtime.c.orig     Wed Mar 26 14:03:34 2003
+++ mkgmtime.c  Wed Mar 26 14:04:19 2003
@@ -100,6 +100,8 @@
 {
        register int    result;

+       if(!atmp) return;
+
        if ((result = (atmp->tm_year - btmp->tm_year)) == 0 &&
                (result = (atmp->tm_mon - btmp->tm_mon)) == 0 &&
                (result = (atmp->tm_mday - btmp->tm_mday)) == 0 &&

So, this works, which means, that atmp is not defined at the second run (it
always dies at the second run!) of tmcomp... 

Best regards,
 Oliver