"Robert" <no@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:n7dot3h2c8kahcckj1gm612pl6j2o4nunh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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. :)
>
Speak for yourself.
If you can't take it with you, I ain't going...:-)
Pete.
--
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."
>
|
