Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 15:20:31 +0200 From: Joerg Wunsch <j@ida.interface-business.de> To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 64-bit time_t safe lease time Message-ID: <20040628152031.A21248@ida.interface-business.de> In-Reply-To: <xzp1xk0ylmu.fsf@dwp.des.no>; from des@des.no on Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 01:20:25PM %2B0200 References: <20040627005719.M38063@cvs.imp.ch> <20040627090642.A75210@ida.interface-business.de> <20040627101539.G38063@cvs.imp.ch> <20040627115951.C75210@ida.interface-business.de> <20040627160033.G75210@ida.interface-business.de> <xzp1xk0ylmu.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > > The problem was that GET_TIME() (first called in script_go()) > > clobbered part of sockaddr_broadcast. The memory area it clobbers > > looks a bit surprising to me, but the actual error became obvious > > then: calling time() on a TIME* object, when sizeof(time_t) != > > sizeof(TIME) is just an error. > > your analysis does not jibe with my reading of the code, since TIME is > defined as time_t: Running with TIME=time_t yielded comletely erratical behaviour (dhclient didn't even send out the initial request since it was hanging around in a supposedly short select() timeout that grew into several thousand years). It's been Martin Blapp's suggestion to define TIME as int32_t instead, which fixes the erratical behaviour, but requires the hack for GET_TIME(). See the patch I've been attaching to my previous mail. Your previous patch didn't fix anything for my situation, sorry. -- J"org Wunsch Unix support engineer joerg_wunsch@interface-systems.de http://www.interface-systems.de/~j/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040628152031.A21248>