On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 06:03:05PM -0600, Chuck Cole wrote: > I think this a seriously wrong solution. Anyone concerned with the real > world and embedded machines, etc, finds the 32-bit architecture adequate for > data representation, qualtitatively more reliable (fewer things to go > wrong), lower cost, and much lower power. In the great majority of storage > and processing words, the integers and double precision math leave 32 bits > per memory location unused. That space is opportunity for error and power > consumption that does nothing for the main and critical application of such > systems and networks. For Linux folk to make a decision that limits the use > of Linux in 32-bit architectures for critical embedded applications seems > mighty dumb to me. Not all Linux hosts are like gaming machines where it > simply does not matter, and 64 bits makes a better game. To me, this > indicates profound ignorance and/or oblivion by those programmers Chuck, It's not the 'Linux folk'. It's coreutils which is a GNU package. BTW: florin at athena$ touch 20401120 history florin at athena$ ls -l history -rw-r--r-- 1 florin other 0 Sep 9 2008 history florin at athena$ uname -a SunOS athena 5.10 Generic_118855-33 i86pc i386 i86pc I suspect the embedded system will do fine in 2039 and beyond. Many of them are 8 or 16 bits, and still manage to do the required time calculations. Cheers, florin -- Bruce Schneier expects the Spanish Inquisition. http://geekz.co.uk/schneierfacts/fact/163 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20071206/5cbca8b5/attachment.pgp