Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Next Week's Kernel Summit Will Try To Take On The 2038 Problem

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pepec9124 View Post
    There should be no 32bit CPUs by then.
    Let me quote from the article you didn't read:
    So 2038 brings the end of time for 32bit architectures. It being some
    twenty four years ahead, it may seem like there is plenty of time for folks
    to migrate to 64bit architectures that are (mostly) unaffected by this
    issue. However, 32bit processors are still being produced today in
    extremely high volumes, and many of those systems are being used in
    commercial, industrial and medical environments, where these systems may be
    quite literally embedded into the walls and machinery and are expected to
    run for 25 years or more. As these small systems become more and more
    pervasive, the risks of major trouble in 2038 grow. And thatâs to say
    nothing of the impact on future classic-car resale prices for fancy cars
    like the Tesla when the high end in-dash display wonât work (gasp!).

    Thus, the âjust upgrade to 64bitâ solution isnât really sufficient,

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ncopa View Post
    Let me quote from the article you didn't read:
    I guess I need a ban.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    346

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pepec9124 View Post
    There should be no 32bit CPUs by then.
    Sure there will be. The Motorola 6800k and Intel i386 are still produced simply because they are very power efficient DSP chips. Same with lower end PPC and ARM chips.

    At the end of the day, there's really only two solutions: Either force users to use a 64-bit type, or re-index the time type. Both break capability somehow.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    85

    Default

    In a student project two-three years ago I have made a GPS tracker on an 8-bit ATmega. So 32-bit processors will probably live till 2100.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    215

    Default

    It must be pretty hard for them Linuxers to see that OpenBSD was first in quite anything.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhux View Post
    It must be pretty hard for them Linuxers to see that OpenBSD was first in quite anything.
    Unlike OpenBSD or NetBSD or whatever ShitBSD, Linux developers are concerned with keeping Linux still usable after solving the 2038 problem.

    It sounds like you have never tried OpenBSD 5.5. It's virtually unusable due to the reckless things OpenBSD lunies did to "solve" the 2038 problem. More then half the ports that do worked previously do not work in this release and more crash randomly. Examples include eclipse, netbeans, qtcreator, geany, etc.

    Linux developers are the ones solving the 2038 problem properly. The BSDs are still behind Linux on this and they'll never catch up.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    215

    Default

    I use OpenBSD 5.6 where everything works well. Can't see your point.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhux View Post
    I use OpenBSD 5.6 where everything works well. Can't see your point.
    You are a half-brain troll. OpenBSD 5.6 does not exists yet. It's supposedly due to come out of the closet in November. Aren't you using Mac OSX and/or Windows cause that's what BSD "users" use.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    215

    Default

    Uhm, yes, I use Mac OS X 5.6. Or Windows 5.6. Or both of them.

    No, actually I use OpenBSD-CURRENT. It was 5.5-CURRENT after the time_t switch (and everything worked perfectly), it's 5.6-CURRENT now. Grab the non-existing OpenBSD 5.6 here and tell me what's unusable there.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1

    Default

    From the article:
    For those out of the loop…
    It's the same thing as the Y2K problem back in 2000, isn't it? Fortunately, unlike Y2K, a fix to the kernel and recompiling some programs should solve the problem.

    Quote Originally Posted by My8th View Post
    They might make up 0.000000000.........1 percent of computers…
    Ha ha! So, one out of every 100 quintillion computers? I didn't realise that that many could exist — roughly as many as atoms in a grain of sand. Unless you meant fewer zeroes and dots, LOL. But, yes, I agree that it's a safe bet that a number of computers may still be running 32-bit Linux; perhaps a few satellites and space vessels; watches; alarm systems; and more. 2038 is only 24 years away.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •