From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 15 05:05:42 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 7C79B16A4CE for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 05:05:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtaw4.prodigy.net (mtaw4.prodigy.net [64.164.98.52]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F80643D41 for ; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 05:05:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (8669efeb6014b9ab6b90fef661f5c0b0@adsl-67-119-53-203.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [67.119.53.203]) by mtaw4.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2FD5eox005649; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 05:05:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DAA7452145; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 05:05:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 05:05:40 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway To: Stephen McKay Message-ID: <20040315130540.GB25353@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200403140716.i2E7GDKa007204@dungeon.home> <20040315000944.GA93356@xor.obsecurity.org> <200403150134.i2F1Y5ew004366@dungeon.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rJwd6BRFiFCcLxzm" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200403150134.i2F1Y5ew004366@dungeon.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP! MAJOR change to FreeBSD/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, 15 Mar 2004 13:05:42 -0000 --rJwd6BRFiFCcLxzm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 11:34:05AM +1000, Stephen McKay wrote: > On Monday, 15th March 2004, Kris Kennaway wrote: >=20 > >On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 05:16:13PM +1000, Stephen McKay wrote: > >> The change to 64-bit time is essential, of course, but I don't underst= and > >> why it has to break backward compatibility. Surely you just allocate a > >> bunch of new system call numbers (for the 64-bit variants) while keepi= ng > >> the old ones (so 32-bit time calls still work) and bump the version > >> number of every library. What else is going on? (I don't have a Sparc > >> or I'd join your experiment.) > > > >No-one donated their time to do it that way. >=20 > I don't think that's relevant. The question is whether it's the right way > to do it or not. If what I've suggested is technically correct (and that= 's > what I believe) then that's how it should be done. It's absolutely relevant. The way things get done around here is that people donate their time to do them. Complaining that "it wasn't done the right way, but I choose not to help" just irritates people. Kris --rJwd6BRFiFCcLxzm Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAVaokWry0BWjoQKURAqIIAKCmnNfmVHudy0NvwNfovwRqGmZszgCfeVc9 wN1bfKJd9D44ujZQ6k3W01U= =VwbK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rJwd6BRFiFCcLxzm--