From owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 26 12:47:04 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12C4016A4CE for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:47:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU [128.205.32.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A81F043D2D for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 12:47:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kensmith@cse.Buffalo.EDU) Received: from electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (kensmith@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i1QKl2Tr009123; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 15:47:03 -0500 (EST) Received: (from kensmith@localhost) by electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (8.12.10/8.12.9/Submit) id i1QKl2gb009122; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 15:47:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 15:47:02 -0500 From: Ken Smith To: John Polstra Message-ID: <20040226204702.GA8602@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: Garance A Drosihn cc: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 64btt cvsup? X-BeenThere: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the Sparc List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 20:47:04 -0000 On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 12:20:33PM -0800, John Polstra wrote: > Advice greatly appreciated. > All of a sudden, without any warning, the time() call is likely to > start scribbling a 0 into either "a" or "b" -- or, worse yet, into > half of the return address or frame pointer. Who knows what the > symptoms of that will be? Will they be deterministic? Will they > cause ugly security vulnerabilities? Whee! I think this is why we might be able to get away with not providing the compatibility stuff - this part isn't quite true. Users can't do a normal upgrade path (cvsup to -current, make buildworld/etc) and get to a 64-bit time_t system. If you try to do an upgrade through the normal path you break your machine at that point. To make it to a 64-bit time_t system without breaking your system you need to follow Garance's instructions and use his tools to do the upgrade. So there kinda is a warning. Does that help any, or is this still a huge mistake? -- Ken Smith - From there to here, from here to | kensmith@cse.buffalo.edu there, funny things are everywhere. | - Theodore Geisel |