Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: R0b0t1 <r030t1@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second!
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 15:53:30
Message-Id: CAAD4mYgXF3_ecaXSpeC4er7mEh6qi1xct8n7957xbkf8GZyy-g@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Don't miss the 1 500 000 000 Unix second! by Matthias Hanft
1 On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 2:08 AM, Matthias Hanft <mh@×××××.de> wrote:
2 > Grant Edwards wrote:
3 >>
4 >> Well, the return type for time() changed from "int" (or was it long?)
5 >> to "time_t" many years back. That said, the actual underlying
6 >> representation has never changed on 32-bit Linux systems. Posix
7 >> requires it to be signed, and on 32-bit Linux systems, it's still
8 >> going to overflow in 2038 -- same as it ever was.
9 >
10 > This is correct:
11 >
12 > mh@n ~ $ date -u -d @2147483647
13 > Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 UTC 2038
14 > mh@n ~ $ date -u -d @2147483648
15 > date: invalid date '@2147483648'
16 >
17 > <crystal ball mode>Will there be any fix until then, or will I have
18 > to reinstall all my 32bit Gentoo systems with 64bit kernels?</crystal
19 > ball mode>
20 >
21
22 The Y2K fixes for systems which could not have old data modified
23 simply treat the imprecise/truncated date field as happening before
24 the event that necessitated the fix.
25
26 You don't have to change any of your files, and updating the programs
27 can happen in place.