Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 09:07:11 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: calm, orderly, deliberate time_t transition.. Message-ID: <3BDD8CBF.80D85ED4@mindspring.com> References: <20011029064257.ACB573808@overcee.netplex.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Wemm wrote: > 2: new platforms should start at time_t 64 bit > > 3: Once we've tested the water on the new platforms, *then* progress > towards activating it on alpha and then x86. > > By then we'll have gathered enough *experience* on the new platforms to > know how much pain the alpha and i386 will have, and we can judge whether > its worth it. Until then, we're speculating. We have no hard data and > no actual real experience. The problem with this is that it pushes both the onus and all the experience off onto the new platform people. FreeBSD already has a considerable x86 bias that any attempt at a new platform has to overcome, just to boot. Putting what amount to gratuitous changes in the path of them is just that much more barrier to entry. It would be an amazing pain to have something that would not work on i386 as 64 bits bite you on the butt merely because on your new platform, it's mandated that it has to change from the i386. What you're basically asking is for people to do ports blind, with a reference platform where the code is potentially substantially different from that expected of the target platform. IMO, the amount of platform dependent code should be minimized, not added to, by whatever policy you end up setting in stone. The 32 bit x86 platform will not live forever... -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3BDD8CBF.80D85ED4>