Re: Y2k Compliance - Afterstep

David Mihm (
Tue, 4 May 1999 15:04:50 -0500 (CDT)

On Tue, 4 May 1999, Ethan wrote:

>On Tue, 4 May 1999, Scott Carlson wrote:
>> I'm sure this has been asked before, but I didn't see it in the FAQ.
>> Are all versions of Afterstep Y2k Compliant?  We are currently running 
>> version 1.0 and may be upgrading to the latest and greatest version soon.  
>> Management is asking how quick we need to do this though.
>> Any information would be appreciated.
>AfterStep does not and has never cared about the current date, so yes, 
>AfterStep is as Y2K compliant as the system it's being run on.
>The more serious question of what will happen in 2106 when the typical 
>32-bit UNIX clock (which is based on Jan 1, 1970) rolls over is, 
>fortunately, a good long ways away. :)

	I think I am having Y2k problems now.  My power keeps going off
and stuff.  Doesn't AfterStep control the Matrix?  And isn't that why my
power is going on and off?  I'm not too sure, but I'd have to say this if
AfterStep's problem.  I did hear something about Ethan going back and
fixing the time problem , is this true?  Maybe we can get him to scoot on
back to see if he missed something.  I know I'd like my power to be
stable.  Fortunately I do have a UPS, but I don't know if it's Y2k
compliant, and I really don't know what operating system it's using.
Hmmm, maybe it's my UPS that's the problem, maybe it has the problem of
Y2k and is experiencing some precursory problems in anticipation of the
coming millenium.  Well, no, I take that back - my UPS keeps the power
going, so I'm back to it being an AfterStep prob.

	Oh, and another thing ... who invented liquid soap and why?

| d a v i d  @  m i h m                         reality.sys corrupt! |
| davemann  @                        reboot universe(y,n)? |
| webmaster @                               ICQ:906859 |
| ftpmaster @       |
           E4 90 15 ED E5 9F 18 8A B0 CC FF 68 61 36 4A 6F