Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Andreas Kohlbach Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup Subject: Re: Linux on a small memory PC Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2022 15:54:23 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 26 Message-ID: <871quvs7m8.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> References: <20220707124733.15776512@ryz> <87sfndt1p2.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> <87zghksqmi.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> <87a69jscpa.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="d0a95c95d2b115ece51b6be58bdd6ca9"; logging-data="851718"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+MNFtkkWGvoZCpOYR3kCNa" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:u42nLel7Txw3oh61NhvsuSXpdfY= sha1:f4KBvONxku9lPnmWDvEel/E7I+k= X-No-Archive: Yes Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:34996 comp.os.linux.setup:4837 On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 19:35:33 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > > On 08/07/2022 19:04, Andreas Kohlbach wrote: >> On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:48:30 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> >>> But seriously, who expects and old 32 bit netbook to be in any kind of >>> serious use in 2038? >> Who expected any old computer from the 60s or 70s still in service >> on >> January 1st 2000? > > They weren't. Just some legacy COBOL code was all. There was a lot. Starting with MS-DOS before 5.0. which weren't not Y2K-compliant. In 2003 I bought an already old Pentium I (1996-ish). The BIOS would not allow to set 2003 as year and went back to 19-something (probably 1903, but I forgot). Subsequently a fairly new Linux did the same. I seem to remember that I told Linux in a start-script to add 100 years to the date. I was at that time in a cheap hotel, and WIFI wasn't around there, so no NTP to access which would have taken care of it. There is more. I think early Apple ][ failed Y2K too. -- Andreas