2 ms·
lol reminds me of the windows 95 crash bug after 49.7 days. Have we learned nothing. https://pipiscrew.github.io/posts/why-window/ https://pipiscrew.github.io/
by loloquwowndueo 7mo ago
lol reminds me of the windows 95 crash bug after 49.7 days. Have we learned nothing. https://pipiscrew.github.io/posts/why-window/ https://pipiscrew.github.io/posts/why-window/
- ok123456 7mo agoQuite literally "the new old thing."
- aranelsurion 7mo agoI was just trying to remember where did I last see this magic number of days.
- loloquwowndueo 7mo agoThe article does mention a few instances found over the years, including the windows one. That’s the one I remember though because we used to joke it was not a big deal - the only way for a windows 95 computer to reach 49 days of uptime is if it’s literally not doing anything or being used in any way. Windows 95 would crash if you looked at it funny.
- flomo 7mo agoOS/2 had a similar bug, and people used that as a server, so I'm sure it bit some people.
- StilesCrisis 7mo agoAnd throws in a Pac-man 8-bit level counter overflow just to remind us that AI cannot be trusted!
- larodi 7mo ago49-7=42 it is all clear
- auspiv 7mo agoprobably same thing for boeing 787 jets - https://www.theregister.com/2020/04/02/boeing_787_power_cycle_51_days_stale_data https://www.theregister.com/2020/04/02/boeing_787_power_cycl... says 51 days, which would be an interesting number of (milli)seconds
- otherme123 7mo agoIt could be an overflow but related with the frequency at which the register was increasing, rather than the max value of te register. E.g. +1 this uint16 (65535) once every 500,000 cycles on this 32 Mhz chip, that previously was a 1 Mhz chip and never had a problem.
- znpy 7mo agothat's why the 49.7 days sounded familiar!