Hello Oli!

10 Nov 19 09:35, you wrote to me:

 AL>> Incidentally, I discovered that the timestamp of that file on
 AL>> disk was showing as November 25, 1961, so it should be a negative
 AL>> value. Converting the decimal to hex yields FFFF FFFF F0C4 3650,
 AL>> which in 2's complement notation is -255576496.  A quick Unix
 AL>> time conversion results in Sat 25 Nov 1961 10:31:44 PM UTC.
 AL>> Therefore, it appears that the value is a correct 64-bit Unixtime
 AL>> for the file timestamp as it was on disk.

 Ol> I didn't expect that SIOREG.ZIP is that old ;-). It makes more sense

It's not.  The file had a timestamp of 01-01-1998 on my OS/2 system; somehow 
the timestamp got grunged when I sent it over to the Linux machine using binkd 
1.1a-99/OS2.  I just tried sending it again, and the same timestamp corruption 
occurred.

 Ol> now. The question is which of the two mailers doesn't handle the
 Ol> negative unix timestamp well.

Yes, and also the 64-bit vs. 32-bit question.  I'll work on further testing 
today.

Andrew

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707