Re: Y2k - Is Linux Ready for the year 2000?

Richard B. Johnson (root@chaos.analogic.com)
Mon, 5 Jan 1998 18:39:47 -0500 (EST)


On Mon, 5 Jan 1998, Jason Wilkins wrote:

> I need documentation concerning Linux's year 2000 compliancy, can anyone
> point me to it?
>
> Jason Wilkins
>
No Unix machine has a problem with the year 2000, no matter how poorly
it may have been implemented.

The problems, if they exist at all, are in __applications__ code! It is
very difficult to make application code using the 'C' runtime library,
that would not work beyond the year 2000. The year 2000 means nothing
special to Unix machines.

Time is kept as an offset from the birthdate of Unix..

#include<stdio.h>
#include<time.h>

main()
{
time_t tim;
struct tm *ts;
tim = (time_t) 0;
ts = localtime(&tim);
printf("Birthday = %s", asctime(ts));
tim = (time_t) 0x7fffffff;
ts = localtime(&tim);
printf("Funeral = %s", asctime(ts));

}

Birthday = Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Funeral = Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038

Before the year 2038, somebody has got to either change the size of
"time_t" or make it unsigned.

Most (if not all) of the year 2000 hype is invented. Only COBOL has
a problem with years beyond "99". NIST has even provided a simple
fix for that.

I have a friend that is making $100/hour "inspecting" code, looking
for "year-2000" problems. He has a license to steal. Of course one
could set the machine time and do a sample run, but that would be
too easy.

Cheers,
Dick Johnson
***** FILE SYSTEM MODIFIED *****
Penguin : Linux version 2.1.70 on an i586 machine (66.15 BogoMips).
Warning : It's hard to remain at the trailing edge of technology.