lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Nasty suprise with uptime
No, but there are a couple of applicable Linux policies:
(1) If it breaks, you get to keep both halves.
(2) If it's broken, fix it yourself.

:)

Matt

On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 12:39:37PM -0800, J Sloan wrote:
> Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > > and received a nasty surprise. The uptime, which had been 496+ days
> > > on Friday, was back down to a few hours. I was ready to lart somebody
> > > with great vigor when I realized the uptime counter had simply wrapped
> > > around.
> > >
> > > So, I thought to myself, at least the 2.4 kernels on our new boxes won't
> >
> > It wraps at 496 days. The drivers are aware of it and dont crash the box
>
> Yes, and these boxes are still running fine - other
> than showing some processes that were started
> in the year 2003... but DAMN, what an eyesore -
> uptime ruined as far as anybody can tell, times
> and dates no longer making any sense.
>
> So, is there an implicit Linux policy to upgrade
> the distro, or at least the kernel, every 496 days
> whether it needs it or not?
>
> ;-)
>
> cu
>
> jjs
>
> -
> 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/

--
Matthew Dharm Home: mdharm-usb@one-eyed-alien.net
Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver

NYET! The evil stops here!
-- Pitr
User Friendly, 6/22/1998
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:11    [W:0.193 / U:1.640 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site