Re: [TUHS] The 2038 bug...

[Dan Cross <crossd@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2503 bytes --]

On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 4:57 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 2:50 PM Dave Horsfall <dave@horsfall.org> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2021, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>>
>> > Alternatively, my understanding is that the Unix epoch changed on
>> > several occasions in the early days.  Presumably the knowledge of how
>> to
>> > achieve this hasn't been lost.  (Though actually performing an epoch
>> > rollover may be more difficult today).
>>
>> My understanding is that it's been 1st Jan 1970 since at least Ed5, if
>> not
>> Ed6.
>>
>
> It's been that way since the 4th edition.
>
> In the 3rd edition it was the number of 60Hz ticks since 1972, along with
> this note: "This guarantees a crisis every 2.26 years."
>
> Rebasing the epoch would be...  tricky... lots of math is done assuming an
> origin of 1970, and not all of it is obvious to even concerted analysis.
>
> Less ugly would be to declare time_t to be unsigned instead of signed...
> It would break less code... Making time_t 64 bits also breaks code, even if
> you declare you don't care about binary compat since many older apps know
> time_t is 32-bits.
>

Lots of older code also knew that pointers were 32 bits and could fit into
an int, that the signal bitmask fit into 32 bits, etc. I feel like we have
these crises every few years and we work around them. The issues here are
perfectly familiar.

A saving grace is that the timestamp fields in Unixy filesystems are almost
invariably 64 bits and have been for a few decades now. Unlike y2k, the
persistence issue is largely fixed except for ersatz binary formats, and
most decently-maintained software hides the width of time behind a typedef.
As for Ted's vignette about hand-coded systems in PDP-11 assembler running
under emulation, I think the issue here is somewhat different: in this
case, by and large, the software doesn't need rewriting, but rather
recompilation on a new hardware and/or OS platform, possibly with some
modifications to fix assumptions about type width. That's qualitatively
different from rewriting from scratch in a different language on a
radically different platform. Note I'm talking about Unix and Linux here,
as opposed to other systems with similar epoch issues.

Certainly there will be some breakage in 2038. But I suspect that we'll
pull a y2k and the critical stuff will be mostly fixed by the time the
epoch rolls over. The long tail will be annoying, as it was with y2k, but
not necessarily critical.

        - Dan C.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3302 bytes --]