Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?

From: Uwe Ohse (uwe@ohse.de)
Date: Thu Jan 06 2000 - 17:47:06 EST


Dominik Kubla wrote:

>Looks as if POSIX and ANSI are (again) at odds...

ISO/IEC 9945-1: 1006, ANSI/IEEE Std 1003.1, 1996 Edition:
        "The following terms and symbols used in this part of ISO/IEC 9945
        are defined in the C Standard {2}: ... time_t."
{2} is ISO/IEC 9899; 1990, the ANSI C standard.

1003.1 mentions a 32-bit integer time_t at least twice;
p 377, B2, "General Terms", "Epoch":
        "Since the issue of time_t overflowing a 32-bit integer occurs
        well before that time, both of these will have to be addressed
        in revisions to POSIX.1".
p 449, B 4.5.1 "Get System Time":
        "Implementations in which time_t is a 32-bit signed integer (most
        historical implementations) will fail in the year 2038. This version
        of POSIX.1 does not address this problem. However, the use of the
        new time_t type is mandated in order to ease this eventual fix".

Regards, Uwe

-
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 - 21:00:07 EST