[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [OT] Re: Y2K compliant



Quoting Yedidya Bar-david <didi@math.tau.ac.il>:
> I have no intentions to start a Y2K thread (war?). However, I must add
> that the fact that an OS has as it's primary data structure for dates
> a 32bit integer for the number of seconds since 1970, still doesn't
> mean it can't have very serious Y2K problems.
I second you. 

The fact that your library provides you a way to be Y2K compliant does not
mean that you are.
Pine for example sorted dates using only two digits for years up to ver. 
3.96 IIRC.
Other programs internally represent the dates incorrectly. 

A good place to start looking is www.debian.org (at the Y2K page). Since 
Debian is not a commercial company (and thus does not have a sales dept. like 
some other distributions...), they can list the problematic packages.

Start looking at the packages that they didn't cover yet, or fix the
problematic ones, if you have the time.

Linux (the KERNEL) IS Y2K compliant, but it may be that a lot of your programs
are not. I don't have the time (and I don't have mission critical servers to
administer too) to read all of the sources of the packages I use, but I'm sure
that some of them are not Y2K compliant. (BTW, neither a lot of other
commercial products that claim to be)


Liran.
-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
Liran Zvibel.                            | " Give a man a fish and you
System Programmer, System Administrator. |   feed him for a day;
email : liranz@actcom.co.il              |   teach him to use the Net  
phone : 972 - 3 - 6493939                |   and he won't bother you
home  : http://www.math.tau.ac.il/~liranz|   for weeks. "
UIN: 708004 ; WHOIS : LZ615              |   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------