Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?

Thierry Vignaud (tvignaud@mandrakesoft.com)
Thu, 06 Jan 2000 16:58:38 +0100

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru: "Re: TIME_WAIT/MSL is 2 seconds--bug/feature?"
Previous message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: [RFC] [RFT] [PATCH] memory zone balancing"
Maybe in reply to: doug@springer.net: "time_t size: The year 2038 bug?"
Next in thread: Johan Kullstam: "Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?"
Next in thread: Jesse Pollard: "Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?"
Reply: Johan Kullstam: "Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?"

Jesse Pollard a écrit :
>
> Johan Kullstam" <kullstam@ne.mediaone.net>
> >i'd also like to see C types with *specified* bit widths, e.g.,
> >int16, int32, uint8 &c. then you could write more portable code when
> >you really need a certain number of bits like for CRC algorithms.

ever head of inttypes.h ???

-
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/

Next message: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru: "Re: TIME_WAIT/MSL is 2 seconds--bug/feature?"
Previous message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: [RFC] [RFT] [PATCH] memory zone balancing"
Maybe in reply to: doug@springer.net: "time_t size: The year 2038 bug?"
Next in thread: Johan Kullstam: "Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?"
Next in thread: Jesse Pollard: "Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?"
Reply: Johan Kullstam: "Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug?"