XF 2.2 Timestamp displayed as "tomorrow"

El Porcharo

Active member
I've just noticed on my user profile that my last seen infos reported Tomorrow at 00:06 (which is a bunch of minutes ago)

I thought I mistaken the translastion phrase, so I checked but the phrase title is tomorrow_at_x

I was wondering: what's the use of this phrase and how can I fix that wrong timestamp?

El Porcharo

Active member
Just got a similar one a moment ago: later_today_at_x again on my profile.

This was related to my last access from this morning at 10:45 (now its 14:42 here in Italy), so I don't understand why an event from the past is treated like if it was a future event.

What's the point of this, guys?

El Porcharo

Active member
Yep! I've already double-checked the Time Zone 😁

It's set to UTC+01:00 which is the Central European Time in both the ACP and my user preferences.
I don't really understand the reason of those phrases being used 🤷‍♂️

That's the "mystery" I'd like to unveil 😅

El Porcharo

Active member
Well... after a bit of struggling (can't see any TZ settings in my Plesk panel) I could see from the phpinfo page that the server time is set to London.
That's -01:00 compared to the italian time, but I think this is not enough to maintain the mismatching even after several hours

I've opened a ticket, let's wait for what the support guys will say

Thanks Andy for your suggestion, will mark it as solution if it will be it (y)


Well-known member
It very well could be this:
  • Your browser doesn't know current time when you performs this actions. I have this behavior only if your PC goes to sleep mode (Windows/macOS - no matter) for a long time (from 12 hours) with opened browser, and when i bring it out of sleep, i can see phrases like "Tomorrow in 12:34" when performing any AJAX actions (such as loading alerts in usermenu) before i refresh the tab.

El Porcharo

Active member

Not sure about yesterday, it might be... :unsure:
But today I let the Windows Update app do its job at lunchtime, plus I always restart the PC again after the update process is done, and so I did.

So don't think it's the case... :unsure:

Thanks, Ozzy, for the hint :)