From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat Feb 10 14:25:04 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id OAA14350
          for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 10 Feb 1996 14:25:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA14345
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 10 Feb 1996 14:25:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id PAA16815; Sat, 10 Feb 1996 15:21:35 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199602102221.PAA16815@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: POSIX 1003.1b compliance (timespec revisited)
To: cimaxp1!jb@werple.net.au (John Birrell)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 1996 15:21:35 -0700 (MST)
Cc: lambert.org!terry@werple.net.au, hackers@FreeBSD.org, jb@cimlogic.com.au
In-Reply-To: <199602102100.IAA07494@werple.net.au> from "John Birrell" at Feb 11, 96 08:00:28 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > FreeBSD is based on the 4.4BSD-Lite code, and has not imported all of
> > the Lite2 improvements, but plans to.
> 
> 
> Regardless of when Lite2 is imported, renaming ts_sec to tv_sec and ts_nsec
> to tv_nsec could take place now. The change doesn't affect the design of the
> code, and as far as I can see, there are no places where ts_sec or ts_nsec
> are used for anything other than fields in the timespec structure.
> 
> [ And even the bogus build process can handle this change! ]


The problem is that it increases the diffs against 4.4BSD-Lite2 in all
file systems, and so hampers integration.

Wait for the 4.4BSD-Lite2 integration, please.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.