[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: January 19, 2038
- From: Paul Tomblin <ptomblin xcski com>
- To: axp-list redhat com
- Subject: Re: January 19, 2038
- Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 19:56:14 -0500
Quoting Dan (morrildl@nycap.rr.com):
>
> > time_t is typedef'ed to __time_t in time.h. And __time_t is typedefed to
> > "long int" in gnu/types.h. So I'd say the time field is 64 bits already. So
> > you've got billions of years before you have to start worrying...
>
> Well, sheesh. When you put it like THAT, the whole issue just loses all its
> dangerous attraction. I don't even want to try it anymore! ;)
So you're not going to set your system clock to some time in the year
292,271,025,015 to see what happens when it rolls over?
(Note the year - time_t is *signed*, so I'm assuming it will roll over 2^63
seconds from 1Jan1970, not 2^64 seconds as somebody posted earlier).
--
Paul Tomblin, not speaking for anybody.
"But I heard him exclaim, as he climbed in the night
Merry Christmas to all, I have traffic in sight" - Phyllis Moses
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
[]