X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:16:55 -0500 (EST) From: Steve Thompson 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: References: <439B555A DOT 80803 AT ineedhosting DOT net> <20051212114933 DOT GG17517 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , 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/