Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 00:11:28 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. Message-ID: <3BD90CA0.E4F60C0E@mindspring.com> References: <20011025233602.587C63808@overcee.netplex.com.au> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0110251708240.99888-100000@beppo> <20011025184936.A4609@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David O'Brien wrote: > I want to chime in and agree with Matt here. > My earlier pushes in this area was to make make FreeBSD consistent. > FreeBSD on one platform should be as alike every other FreeBSD platform > as we can make it. > > Thus I want time_t to be the same size on every FreeBSD platform so that > time wrap-arounds happen in the same way on the most popular platform > (read i386) which gets a lot of testing and defines what is FreeBSD in > behavior, and the Alpha platform (which at times seems to only have a > hand-full of users). As we get more platforms, we are only going to have > more of the problem of FreeBSD really only being well used on one of our > offered architectures. Add me to the "me too" camp. The most interesting use of this would be to have a user space x86 emulator (like one of the two in ports) that mmaps x86 executables, and then interprets them, handling traps by trapping to native system calls on the local system. There's a lot of x86 commercial software that won't run on Alpha/SPARC/MIPS that could be accessed this way... -- 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?3BD90CA0.E4F60C0E>