Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 21:23:38 -0500 From: Steve Price <steve@FreeBSD.ORG> To: "Jeremy C. Reed" <reed@reedmedia.net> Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: top uptime! Message-ID: <20010420212338.Z41536@bsd.havk.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104201716040.17317-100000@pilchuck.reedmedia.net>; from reed@reedmedia.net on Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 05:38:21PM -0700 References: <20010421093009.M72002@wantadilla.lemis.com> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0104201716040.17317-100000@pilchuck.reedmedia.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 05:38:21PM -0700, Jeremy C. Reed wrote: > > > I ran Linux 2.0.36 for 497 days. It had some known 497-day bug (jiffy > > > problem?) that crashed it with a kernel panic. > > > > Is it possible that this bug was fixed less than 595 days ago? That > > seems to be the only sensible explanation I can find for Linux' > > complete absence from this list. This topic came up just yesterday on a Linux user's group list that I'm listen in on here in town. A guy who I believe to be very knowlegable about Linux (especially RedHat, he even willingly bought a red fedorra) said that the bug that caused Linux to crash after 497.1 days was fixed quite some time ago. However the uptime counter (cat /proc/uptime) is counted in seconds in a 32bit variable. So it isn't possible for a Linux box to show more than 497 days of uptime because the uptime rolls over then. FWIW. -steve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010420212338.Z41536>