Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 4 Dec 1998 09:12:47 -0600 (CST) | From | "S. Shore" <> | Subject | Re: Y2k compliance |
| |
In fact, the year 2000 isn't a leap year. A little-known rule of leapyears (iirc) is that any year divisible by 100 (i think) can't be a leapyear.
Scott.
On Fri, 4 Dec 1998 robbie@scot-mur.demon.co.uk wrote:
> Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 01:03:30 +0000 > From: robbie@scot-mur.demon.co.uk > To: Linux Kernel List <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu> > Subject: Re: Y2k compliance > > On Thu, Dec 03, 1998 at 10:30:44AM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > > On Thu, 3 Dec 1998, Chris Wedgwood wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Dec 02, 1998 at 11:53:57AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote: > > > > > > > Linux ignores the RTC century byte (for good reason). Before I put > > > > this fix in, when the year wrapped to 00 Linux would read the RTC > > > > year as 1900. So a reboot (who does that anyway?) would give a > > > > classic Y2K time warp. > > > > > > So how does it know what century it is? > > > > If the right part of the year is less then z it's 20xx if it's greater > > it's 19xx > So how does it cope with 2000 being a leep year? In the small ammount of > experimenting I have done, the year goes back to 1980, not 1900. I think > linux needs some way of dealing with these buggy machines, probably in > user space. > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > > -- > > Robbie Murray > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |