Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 14:54:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Kline <kline@thought.org> To: jonc@pinnacle.co.nz (Jonathan Chen) Cc: anne-randle.itsd@vin1.dudley.gov.uk, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Year 2000 compliancy Message-ID: <199707152154.OAA24246@tao.thought.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SGI.3.95.970716090010.7855B-100000@tui.pinnacle.co.nz> from Jonathan Chen at "Jul 16, 97 09:08:06 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
According to Jonathan Chen: > On Tue, 15 Jul 1997, A. Randle wrote: > [[ ... ]] > > End-user software written on them are another story; you have to ask > the developer(s) involved. /* Hopefully, anyone savvy enough to write for Unix-esque systems, thought of this. But then, one never knows... */ > > On the other hand, there may be a problem when the Epoch rollover > occurs (I think this, occurs somewhere around 2036), if the system > is still 32 bit based. > > Within 5 years, I'd bet that most of the unix world has gone to 64-bits. At work, we're doing a 64-bit port of BSD, which allows time-backwards into the Jurrasic (I believe), and forward when humans will probably be extinct. ---I still think we ought to use a 128-bit timestamp, tho. Just because. Nutshell: whoever is intelligent enough to use unix probably needn't worry. gary kline > -- Gary D. Kline kline@tao.thought.org Public service uNix
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199707152154.OAA24246>