From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Aug 19 08:20:35 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA28929 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 19 Aug 1998 08:20:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from pau-amma.whistle.com (s205m64.whistle.com [207.76.205.64]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA28856 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 1998 08:20:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dhw@whistle.com) Received: (from dhw@localhost) by pau-amma.whistle.com (8.8.8/8.8.7) id IAA23782 for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Wed, 19 Aug 1998 08:19:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dhw) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 08:19:28 -0700 (PDT) From: David Wolfskill Message-Id: <199808191519.IAA23782@pau-amma.whistle.com> To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: proposal to not change time_t In-Reply-To: <199808190737.CAA19503@unix.tfs.net> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >From: Jim Bryant >Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 02:37:14 -0500 (CDT) >the fell-swoop approach is not unprecedented under freebsd. all i am >thinking of here is the userland code and DATA out there that will >need a more gradual migration. As y'all are considering these things, please do not overlook the issue of archived data (some of which may be in more filesystem-specific formats than others). It *may* be useful for restore (for example) to be able to use rather different notions of the structure of an inode depending on certain criteria (such as a date or a flag, for example). I think expecting folks to restore & re-archive data would be impractical, to put it about as nicely as I can think of. It may well be that by means of such an approach, the effects of the change (with respect to archived data) could be mitigated to "bearable." david -- David Wolfskill UNIX System Administrator dhw@whistle.com voice: (650) 577-7158 pager: (650) 371-4621 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message