Re: linux clock overun in 2038 - a solution

1998-01-09 Thread Hamish Moffatt 
On Fri, Jan 09, 1998 at 04:24:22PM +0100, Jon Bendtsen wrote:
 while we are setting the clock to be 64 bit rather than 32 bitr, couldnt
 we also just set the 0
 to be 1/1-2000 00:00:00 ?

There is really no advantage to that. 64 bits will last long enough,
no need to change the epoch! And it would break yet more software.


Hamish
-- 
Hamish Moffatt, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5
CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome.   http://hamish.home.ml.org


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .

Re: linux clock overun in 2038 - a solution

1998-01-09 Thread Will Lowe 
On Sat, 10 Jan 1998, Hamish Moffatt wrote:

 On Fri, Jan 09, 1998 at 04:24:22PM +0100, Jon Bendtsen wrote:
  while we are setting the clock to be 64 bit rather than 32 bitr, couldnt
  we also just set the 0
  to be 1/1-2000 00:00:00 ?
 There is really no advantage to that. 64 bits will last long enough,
 no need to change the epoch! And it would break yet more software.

Besides that then you wouldn't be able to keep track of dates before 2000
... 
Will


--
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |
|   http://www.cis.udel.edu/~lowe/   |
--
|If at first you don't succeed,  redefine success.   |
|   -- Taken from Hennesey and Patterson,|
| _Computer_Organization_And_Design_:_The_Hardware_/_Software_Interface_ |
--


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 
Trouble?  e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .