Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 09:52:43 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>, Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0110300949340.26174-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <20011030173210.59A5F39F4@overcee.netplex.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, Peter Wemm wrote: > Bruce Evans wrote: > > On Mon, 29 Oct 2001, Peter Wemm wrote: > > > > > ... UFS does not have future dates ... > > > > Script started on Tue Oct 30 21:04:39 2001 > > ttyv7:bde@delplex:/tmp> touch -t 203801011230 foo > > ttyv7:bde@delplex:/tmp> ls -l foo > > -rw-r--r-- 1 bde wheel 0 Jan 1 2038 foo > > ttyv7:bde@delplex:/tmp> exit > > I know that.. This is a contrived example. atime, mtime, ctime are defined > as the time that the file was last operated on. One does not do 30-year > mortgage calculations using ufs file timestamps. The only dates they *need* > to support is "a long time ago" through "now". One added note however.. I am expecting that there will be embedded systems being deployed NOW that will be in service in 2038. I have personally seen systems I installed in 1982 still running with NO sign of being replaced.. (probably will go on controlling stuff until the building is pulled down around them). If they have flash filesystems with timestamps it might be nice if they didn't go wierd in 2038.. > > Cheers, > -Peter > -- > Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au > "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0110300949340.26174-100000>