Is this a real update or a fake update



  • 2.4.5.r.20200220.0000 it does not match the date codeScreenshot_2020-02-20 pos localdomain - Status Dashboard.png


  • LAYER 8

    what do you mean? 20 feb 2020,it seem right to me
    0000 .. it's the first update after -RC at midnight ? GMT-6 ? 🤷
    or maybe they should check the cr2032 if it's in good condition if the clock is unsynchronized, 😂 it's here ->Immagine.jpg



  • @kiokoman there are lots 4 digits 0000 there is no dash after the date
    Example 2.4.5.r.20200220-0000 it post look like. this not post to looking like this 2.4.5.r.20200220.0000


  • LAYER 8

    idk, the format has always been that
    for example:
    2.4.5.r.20200211.0854
    2020/02/11 at 08:54
    2.4.5.r.20200212.1633
    2020/02/12 at 16:33
    now is
    2.4.5.r.20200220.0000
    2020/02/20 at 00:00
    jimp probably worked late into the night 😂



  • @Grapeape22 said in Is this a real update or a fake update:

    2.4.5.r.20200220.0000 it does not match....

    Check your own OS : probably Windows 10, but it has an build number and date :

    0be94fc8-4c03-4dab-b8ee-c66611218b7b-image.png

    The format is slightly different.

    MAC user ? Same thing.

    Also : read the 2.4.5 RC annoucment.


  • Rebel Alliance Developer Netgate

    We're working on migrating the builds over to a new coordinated system that is not only faster but will have consistent timestamps for everything across all builds that start at the same time. It will trigger at set times, multiple times per day, rather than on demand as commits happen, but can still be set off manually if we want.

    Other than the timestamps being more "even" in most cases, it should be transparent to users.

    The timestamp on the individual images will be when the entire build run starts and not necessarily when that kernel build timestamp happens.


Log in to reply