X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Date:	Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:16:55 -0500 (EST)
From:	Steve Thompson <smt AT vgersoft DOT com>
Reply-To:	smt AT vgersoft DOT com
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: 'uptime' command producing incorrect uptime
In-Reply-To:	<20051212114933.GG17517@calimero.vinschen.de>
Message-ID:	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0512121916070.28916@dahlia.vgersoft.com>
References:	<439B555A DOT 80803 AT ineedhosting DOT net> <Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 58 DOT 0512101742440 DOT 16549 AT dahlia DOT vgersoft DOT com> <20051212114933 DOT GG17517 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Dec 10 17:50, Steve Thompson wrote:
> >  It also appears to
> > be wrong for uniprocessor hosts that have been up for more than 49.7 days
> > because of the 32-bit value returned by GetTickCount(); my own system
> > reported an uptime of 16 days after being up for 66 days.
>
> It's using GetTickCount only if neither GetSystemTimes, nor
> NtQuerySystemInformation is available, which is on Win9x.
> NT systems shouldn't be affected by this.

Yes, of course you're right. No danger of 9x being up for that long!

Steve

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -