Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Programming > Cobol > Re: The next Y2...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 2 of 5 Topic 4058 of 4191
Post > Topic >>

Re: The next Y2K: Y2.038K bug

by Robert <no@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Mar 15, 2008 at 03:58 PM

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 10:19:26 -0400, Robin Lee <robinlee@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>http://www.switched.com/2008/03/14/2038-the-year-the-internet-will-end/
>
>The Unix 2038 bug probably isn't news to some. But it reminds me of the
prevalent 
>attitude ten years ago, that COBOL programmers were negligent or "lazy"
for taking 
>shortcuts with dates. I'm guessing that in 1970 no one thought we'd be
using UNIX in 
>the next century.

Unix's system timer has a window 1970 through 2037 for positive values and
1901 through
1969 for negative values.  It is stored in an unsigned int, which has 31
bits of data and
a sign. The timer resolution is one second. There are 2^31 seconds in 68
years. 

There is no easy fix for two reasons:
1. It is not practical to upgrade the operating system in embedded
processors, 
    such as in car engines, medical devices, telephones.
2. Some have used timer_t format in files and messages. Any change would
'break' 
    old software and file data. 

Operating systems compiled to 64 bits store the time as a 63-bit long int,
which can
represent billions of years. Records and messages using timer_t must be
reformatted. Going
to an unsigned integer would buy 68 years, but break dates before 1970
e.g. your birth
date. A sliding window would be unacceptable because the recipient of
messages and records
would not know where the creator's epoch began. 

Who cares? We'll be gone by 2038.  :)
 




 5 Posts in Topic:
The next Y2K: Y2.038K bug
Robin Lee <robinlee@[E  2008-03-15 10:19:26 
Re: The next Y2K: Y2.038K bug
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-03-15 15:58:21 
Re: The next Y2K: Y2.038K bug
"Pete Dashwood"  2008-03-16 11:15:03 
Re: The next Y2K: Y2.038K bug
Mickey <mickeyb@[EMAIL  2008-03-25 11:48:11 
Re: The next Y2K: Y2.038K bug
tim <TimJ@[EMAIL PROTE  2008-03-25 20:59:46 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Thu Jul 24 3:09:29 CDT 2008.