From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Jun 3 9:57:43 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7939037B403 for ; Sun, 3 Jun 2001 09:57:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au) Received: from bde.zeta.org.au (bde.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.102]) by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id CAA10444; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 02:57:29 +1000 Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 02:55:52 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org To: Poul-Henning Kamp Cc: John Polstra , arch@FreeBSD.ORG, drosih@rpi.edu Subject: Re: time_t definition is wrong In-Reply-To: <44610.991550564@critter> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <200106022043.f52KhFh35078@vashon.polstra.com>, John Polstra writes: > > >I'd prefer to keep it as "long" at least on the i386, because that's > >what the type was for years before ANSI renamed it to "time_t". > > That, in my mind, is actually a good argument for making it "int" so > that we can flush out those places which don't use time_t well in > advance of the unaviodable change to >32 bits... This is the main reason that I changed it. However, I didn't intend the change to be committed anywhere except in -current. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message