Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-17 Thread Joerg Schilling
Grant Edwards wrote: > Well, the return type for time() changed from "int" (or was it long?) > to "time_t" many years back. That said, the actual underlying > representation has never changed on 32-bit Linux systems. Posix > requires it to be signed, and on 32-bit

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-15 Thread Walter Dnes
On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 02:23:44PM +, Grant Edwards wrote > It's not just the kernel. If you want to avoid the 32-bit time > problem, then you need to re-install all of the user-space librairies > and binary exectuables that use the time() libc function. I believe that postgresql 32-bit

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-15 Thread R0b0t1
On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 2:08 AM, Matthias Hanft wrote: > Grant Edwards wrote: >> >> Well, the return type for time() changed from "int" (or was it long?) >> to "time_t" many years back. That said, the actual underlying >> representation has never changed on 32-bit Linux systems.

[gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-15 Thread Grant Edwards
On 2017-07-15, Matthias Hanft wrote: > Grant Edwards wrote: >> >> Well, the return type for time() changed from "int" (or was it long?) >> to "time_t" many years back. That said, the actual underlying >> representation has never changed on 32-bit Linux systems. Posix >> requires

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-15 Thread Matthias Hanft
Grant Edwards wrote: > > Well, the return type for time() changed from "int" (or was it long?) > to "time_t" many years back. That said, the actual underlying > representation has never changed on 32-bit Linux systems. Posix > requires it to be signed, and on 32-bit Linux systems, it's still >

[gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-14 Thread Grant Edwards
On 2017-07-14, Jigme Datse Yli-RAsku wrote: > > On 2017-07-14 08:15, Andrew Tselischev wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 08:42:01PM +0700, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote: >> >> when time_t reaches 2 billion. >> > >> > He meant 2k38 problem, when time_t will

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-14 Thread Jigme Datse Yli-RAsku
On 2017-07-14 08:15, Andrew Tselischev wrote: > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 08:42:01PM +0700, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote: > >> when time_t reaches 2 billion. > > > > He meant 2k38 problem, when time_t will overflow int32 :) > > I would bet that somewhere there is a quick-job shell script that

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-14 Thread Andrew Tselischev
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 08:42:01PM +0700, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote: > > when time_t reaches 2 billion. > > He meant 2k38 problem, when time_t will overflow int32 :) I would bet that somewhere there is a quick-job shell script that parses unix timestamps with regular expressions and

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-14 Thread Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov
> when time_t reaches 2 billion. He meant 2k38 problem, when time_t will overflow int32 :) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-14 Thread Joerg Schilling
Matthias Hanft wrote: > Neil Bothwick wrote: > > > > That's a relief, I though we were in for another Y2K-like apocalypse. > > As far as I know, next apocalypse is scheduled for January 19th, 2038, > 03:14:08 UTC, isn't it? > > At that time, I'll be 73 years old, and I hope I'm

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-14 Thread Matthias Hanft
Neil Bothwick wrote: > > That's a relief, I though we were in for another Y2K-like apocalypse. As far as I know, next apocalypse is scheduled for January 19th, 2038, 03:14:08 UTC, isn't it? At that time, I'll be 73 years old, and I hope I'm not gonna be sysadmin any more... :-) -Matt

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-14 Thread Neil Bothwick
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 05:00:38 +0200, wabe wrote: > > What a big coincidence. I read this threat about half a minute > > before > > Sorry. Of course I meant "thread" and not "threat". ;-) That's a relief, I though we were in for another Y2K-like apocalypse. -- Neil Bothwick If at first you

[gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-14 Thread Nikos Chantziaras
On 14/07/17 05:40, R0b0t1 wrote: On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 8:01 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote: Hi all! I'd like to remind you that $ date -d @15 is drawing close! Don't miss the moment :) Here it is! I missed it. Damn sleep. I need to quit sleeping, waste of

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-13 Thread wabe
wabe wrote: > Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > > > On 13/07/17 21:15, Kent Fredric wrote: > > > On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 16:01:42 +0300 > > > Andrew Savchenko wrote: > > > >> I'd like to remind you that > > >>$ date -d @15 >

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-13 Thread wabe
Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 13/07/17 21:15, Kent Fredric wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 16:01:42 +0300 > > Andrew Savchenko wrote: > > >> I'd like to remind you that > >>$ date -d @15 > >> is drawing close! > >> > >> Don't miss the moment

[gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!

2017-07-13 Thread Nikos Chantziaras
On 13/07/17 21:15, Kent Fredric wrote: On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 16:01:42 +0300 Andrew Savchenko wrote: I'd like to remind you that $ date -d @15 is drawing close! Don't miss the moment :) watch -n 1 'echo $(( 15 - $( date +"%s") ))' Enjoy. watch -n 1