From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 22 19:12:09 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7270D16A4CE for ; Sun, 22 Feb 2004 19:12:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp2.server.rpi.edu (smtp2.server.rpi.edu [128.113.2.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DE9C43D1F for ; Sun, 22 Feb 2004 19:12:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.netel.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by smtp2.server.rpi.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i1N3C5nI017463 for ; Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:12:05 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: drosih@mail.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:12:04 -0500 To: current@freebsd.org From: Garance A Drosihn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . canit . ca) Subject: Re: HEADSUP: Commits Planned for 64-bit time_t on sparc64 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 03:12:09 -0000 At 9:58 PM -0500 2/22/04, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > >All of these changes will cause zero changes for people who are >running on other hardware platforms. Only sparc64 users have to lay >awake in terror of what this change might do to them. I should note >that it *has* been working fine for me... :-) Also, about a dozen >other sparc64 users have used these files to make a successful >transition, with very few problems reported. As I write this, it is known there is some problem with dhclient in the base system. It seems that people who need dhcp can get around that problem by using the isc-dhcp3-client port, but I would hope we could get the base-system version fixed before March 3rd. It is quite possible there are other bugs lurking. Please note that I am making absolutely no promise to track down and solve every problem might be triggered by this move to 64-bTT. Ken Smith is also helping out with some other background-work which will help users making this change. I will also probably try to add a check in the makefiles to prevent "foot-shooting", based on an example that Marcel wrote up. The idea is warn people if they mistakenly go to install a 32-bTT system over the top of a system which is already running 64-bTT. >... So if we can not make this change by >March 15th (at the latest), then I think we will have to put >it off until 6.0. Obviously I would prefer if we did not put it off, but I also realize that we had originally said we would wanted to be at this point ("ready to make the change") by mid-January, so we are running a bit late in the schedule. >In fact, if I had a fix for the dhclient issue I would >prefer to move both of the planned commits up by a week. As to the problem I was referring to here. The base-system dhclient seems to *sometimes* work for *some* sparc64 users who have made the transition, but it has problems for other users. I know it worked for me on a few tests, but I don't usually use it. Now that I am trying to use it, it seems to never work on my sparc... (but the version from ports seems to work) -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu