Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 09:18:55 -0600 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: jbryant@unix.tfs.net, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, jkh@time.cdrom.com Subject: Re: proposal to not change time_t Message-ID: <199808191518.JAA20039@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199808190502.WAA01835@usr06.primenet.com> References: <199808190209.VAA12243@unix.tfs.net> <199808190502.WAA01835@usr06.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> for the bad reason of maintaining the nanosecond hack. .... > > when a decision is made for real migration, #define's can be used as > > an interim kludge to port EXISTING time_t code without code changes. > > The existing time_t is not a problem. The existing time_t is 32 bits. > A 64 bit time_t is only a problem because the fields reserved for a > 64 bit time_t were stolen. Recover them! They are stolen propery! > They *belong* to time_t! For what it's worth, the nsec fields in the FS were *stolen* by the very folk that brought us UFS. They are part of Lite2. (I just checked). So, you're whining to the wrong crowd. Go yell at Kirk for awhile, and see what his response is. :) :) Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199808191518.JAA20039>