Re: Y2K rollover Vigilance

["Saravana Ram" <Ram () POP Jaring My>]

> Having checked all out, what do you think of turning the date back, say, 28
years
> in the past, just in case.  Do you all wizards know of any 72year
> problem?.   Seeing that the day's configurations is the same every
> 28 years, we think that all systems that don't depend of the actual
> date should be moved back.  After the rollover period (which we
> extend up to first days of March), all we have to do is modify the
> year part of the date in the logs for our processing (ie: 1971 =
> 1999, 1972 = 2000).

Okay, I'm a little daft, but why do you want this? How does the exactly
identical day configuration have any significance to the Y2k problem?