Re: lynx and amazon?
Bela Lubkin <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.lynx.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Ian Collier wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 04:55:38PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > > Ian Collier dixit: > > >and moreover, the later 2039 ones caused the earlier 2036 ones to be deleted. > > > Oooooh, do you have a system with 32-bit time_t? > > Well... no. This is x86_64 and the default size of time_t is 64 bits. > The Lynx binary is a 64-bit binary. I don't know how it was compiled. Be that as it may -- the 32-bit rollover hypothesis still seems strong to me. 2036 cookies get recorded, 2039 don't. Even with a 64-bit binary, it may be that some part of either Lynx itself, or the libraries on that particular system, pass the date through a 32-bit bottleneck at some point. (Yes, it could be caused by Lynx code even if someone else demonstrated not having this issue on *their* 64-bit Lynx: the date computation may at some point pass through a system-header-provided data type which for some reason is 32-bit on one build and 64 on the other.) >Bela< _______________________________________________ Lynx-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lynx-dev