From owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 14 18:38:33 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 DA79916A4CF for ; Sun, 14 Mar 2004 18:38:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp4.server.rpi.edu (smtp4.server.rpi.edu [128.113.2.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D8D743D31 for ; Sun, 14 Mar 2004 18:38:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.netel.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by smtp4.server.rpi.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i2F2cWoP032349; Sun, 14 Mar 2004 21:38:32 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <200403142020.i2EKKb623538@netlx014.civ.utwente.nl> References: <200403142020.i2EKKb623538@netlx014.civ.utwente.nl> Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 21:38:31 -0500 To: "Roderick van Domburg" , From: Garance A Drosihn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . canit . ca) Subject: Re: Reasons for 64-bTT & DHCP import 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: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 02:38:34 -0000 At 9:20 PM +0100 3/14/04, Roderick van Domburg wrote: >Hello everyone, > >Thank your for the excellent documentation that comes with the >64-bTT change. I am following it on my Enterprise 250 as we speak. Hopefully you'll still be happy with it after you're done... :-) >Probably a Real Stupid question, but why hasn't __time_t been a >__int64_t from the beginning? I'm asking out of sheer curiosity >and insight in development. I think it was just that both i386 and alpha had 32-bit time_t's, so it seemed reasonable to stick with that for sparc64. Later on, the ia64 and amd64 ports started up, and they decided to go with 64-bTT. After thinking about that a little, it seemed like we might as well switch to 64-bTT for sparc64 right now, instead of waiting for when the i386 and alpha ports will switch. Also, I think we initially hoped that "5.x-stable" was going to happen much sooner than it did. And given our original hopes for that schedule, it seemed better to go with the 32-bTT that we were already familiar with. >Also, I am curious why we're not importing ISC DHCP 3 in the >base system. Skimming over the ISC license, I don't see any >direct issues. Once again: don't mean to bash, just curious. This one I don't know about. I'm lucky enough that my sparc64 machine does not have to use dhcp at all... :-) -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu