Re: Y2K-like bug to hit Linux computers! - Info of the day

[christos gentsis <christos_gentsis@yahoo.co.uk>]

jnf wrote:

>submission$ cat test.c
>int main(void) {
>        signed short int count = 0;
>
>        while(count >= 0 ) {
>                printf("count: %d\n", count++ );
>        }
>        printf("count: %d\n");
>}
>submission$ gcc -o test test.c
>submission$ ./test
>[...]
>count: 32767
>count: -1
>
>  
>
correct but i didn't mean that... i mean how to become negative with out
an overflow...

>I could be wrong here, but I don't think the hardware even keeps track of
>the clock ticks, rather it just ticks and lets the software keep track.
>
>  
>
it has to have hardware because if there is not so how the time is
updated then the system is turned off? ;)
it has to be hardware that keeps working...