Messages in this thread | | | From | "Johan Kullstam" <> | Subject | Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug? | Date | 06 Jan 2000 18:47:40 -0500 |
| |
Dominik Kubla <dominik.kubla@uni-mainz.de> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2000 at 05:13:00PM -0600, Bill Wendling wrote: > > > My main point was that 38 years is a LONG TIME in the computer industry. > > Are you still using Wordperfect 5.1 on a 386 DOS machine at 40 MHz? It > > requires much less energy than the Windows boxen running at 200+MHz and > > it has the added feature that secretaries really liked it and the Windows > > version of the same product sucked (from what I understand). That was 10 > > years ago... > > But your are completely missing the point! What chip is in your cell phone? > Most likely an ARM or Mips. 32bits. What chip is used in Fords electronic > motor control? PPC4xx. 32bits. What chip is used in the german d-box (DVB > settop box)? M68323 with the next generation going for PPC4xx. Still > 32bits.
it matters not that the MIPS R3K is 32-bits or not. consider:
1) the lowly 8-bit motorola 6502 is capable of 64 bit math by chaining eight 8-bit operations.
2) even when CPUs are 64-bit, e.g., dec/compaq-alpha, time_t is still often 32-bits.
people do and will continue to do stuff like
time_t tx; ... time(&tx); write(tx,sizeof(time_t),fd);
and this gets embedded into fileformats like tar and various databases making it very hard to change.
just like y2k, it's not a question of cpu, but of data and file formats.
since the binary time format is so pervasive, i predict it will be harder to fix than the y2k problem. in y2k it was mostly I/O format strings and BCD dates in COBOL datastructures. 2038 will be all of unix.
-- J o h a n K u l l s t a m [kullstam@ne.mediaone.net] Don't Fear the Penguin!
- 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/
| |