![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On 3 Oct 2001, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> writes: > > > Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> writes: > > > > > For stat is also requires a changed glibc ABI -- the glibc/2.4 stat64 > > > > Not only stat64, also plain stat. > > > > > structure reserved an additional 4 bytes for every timestamp, but these > > > either need to be used to give more seconds for the year 2038 problem > > > or be used for the ms fractions. y2038 is somewhat important too. > > > > The fields are meant for nanoseconds. The y2038 will definitely be > > solved by time-shifting or making time_t unsigned. In any way nothing > > of importance here and now. Especially since there won't be many > > systems which are running today and which have a 32-bit time_t be used > > then. For the rest I'm sure that in 37 years there will be the one or > > the other ABI change. > > Right. Given current uptimes and being optimistic the fix for y2038 > is probably needed by 2030 or just a little later. But in any case > 64 bit systems should be maxing out by then, and the conversion to 128 > bit systems should have already happened on the server side. 32 bit > systems will likely be limited to embedded and legacy systems by then. > > Eric Why do I get the feeling no one has learned from the problems the computer industry had with 2 digit date fields? Odds are legacy systems will be running something people for whatever reason couldn't replace. Gerhard -- Gerhard Mack gmack@innerfire.net <>< As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:03 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||