Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: 21st Century UN*X - Bugs??
Message-ID: <12169@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 16 Feb 90 23:59:01 GMT
References: <2198@syma.sussex.ac.uk>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 15

In article <2198@syma.sussex.ac.uk> stevedc@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Stephen D Carter) writes:
>Frankly, if it is true, I'll not mail my order for a Un*x system, but
>will go back to a sensible Operating System.

Feel free.  Anyone who believes everything he reads in a newspaper
deserves to be saddled with a "sensible" operating system.

The factual basis for the silly concern is that 32 bits is used in
many current UNIX implementations to hold a count of the number of
seconds since the beginning of 1970 (UT).  By the time we have to
worry about running out of bits, 64-bit implementations will
probably be the norm.

By the way, your "sensible" operating systems have had similar problems
in the past..