Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?

From: Bill Wendling (wendling@ganymede.isdn.uiuc.edu)
Date: Thu Jan 06 2000 - 12:31:06 EST


Also sprach Rik van Riel:
} On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, Bill Wendling wrote:
}
} > So, I'm simply saying that, while looking into my crystal ball,
}
} If computing history has taught us anything, it is that you cannot
} look into a crystal ball and tell what the future is going to be
} like.
}
} Be prepared.
}
I forgot the <sarcasm> XML tags for that above sentence...

} > There are people offering support for [234]86s?
}
} The last 286s running SCO Xenix have been phased out
} before Y2K -- yes, those machines had been running for
} 8 or more years, processing business-critical data and
} vigorously shaking off the dust their contemporaries
} had been gathering for years...
}
} 386s and 486s are still being used and supported,
} the 386s are mostly found in embedded systems and
} the 486s in slighly older but still fully functional
} servers...
}
} (and yes, they are actively being supported)
}
I stand corrected on this and the PDP-10 thing. If people are still using
these machines, wee fun!

        Bill

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 07 2000 - 21:00:06 EST