Re: Summary of the 2038 BoF at DC17
- Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2017 04:04:27 +0200
- From: Adam Borowski <kilobyte@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Summary of the 2038 BoF at DC17
On Sat, Sep 02, 2017 at 12:58:54AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> What's the problem?
> UNIX time_t is 31 bits (signed), counting seconds since Jan 1,
> 1970. It's going to wrap.. It's used *everywhere* in UNIX-based
> systems. Imagine the effects of Y2K, but worse.
> Glibc is the next obvious piece of the puzzle - almost everything
> depends on it. Planning is ongoing at
> to provide 64-bit time_t support without breaking the existing 32-bit
I find it strange that you don't mention x32 anywhere. Dealing with
assumptions that time_t = long was the majority of work with this port; a
lot of software still either did not apply submitted patches or accepted
only dumb casts to (long) instead of a proper y2038-proof solution.
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ Vat kind uf sufficiently advanced technology iz dis!?
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ -- Genghis Ht'rok'din