Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199707152154.OAA24246>