![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
----- Original Message ----- From: Richard B. Johnson <root@chaos.analogic.com> To: <doug@springer.net> Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2000 3:32 PM Subject: Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug? > On Wed, 5 Jan 2000 doug@springer.net wrote: > > > I have tentatively searched the linux kernel archives for this subject, > > but haven't found anything. I have heard that there is talk about > > moving this to 64 bits. Has anyone considered this (stupid > > question) and who else is interested in this subject. It seems to be > > a kernel and a glibc issue. Since I am not currently subscribed to > > the list, please cc doug@springer.net for any replies. When time > > allows, I intend to experiment with the 64 bit thing and see what > > breaks. > > -Doug Springer > > [snip] > I think that before 38 years is up, none of us will be using 32-bit > machines so, even if I was 10 years old, I wouldn't bother 'fixing' > 32-bit machines. Even Intel's new stuff is 64 bits. Just on a side note, isn't that what they said about two digit dates back in the 70's? ;) James - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||