Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2007 01:11:59 +0100 From: Matthieu Michaud <matthieu@nxdomain.fr> To: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> Cc: standards@freebsd.org Subject: Re: make struct timeval posix compliant ? Message-ID: <47573E4F.9070403@nxdomain.fr> In-Reply-To: <20071205132138.J6892@delplex.bde.org> References: <47559FF0.5090008@nxdomain.fr> <20071205132138.J6892@delplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bruce Evans wrote: > On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Matthieu Michaud wrote: > >> Few months ago I sent a mail to stable@freebsd.org in the hope to >> discuss struct timeval posix conformance in RELENG_6. >> >> http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1397BA88-CC55-4585-86CB-3BD08FBABEF5 >> >> Given the few answers, I may have targetted the wrong mailing list or >> this change has no interest. So, here are the questions again : >> >> - Do you want FreeBSD 6 to conform posix specs for struct timeval ? >> (it's not always a right thing to do to strictly conform standards) > > No, but I don't use FreeBSD-6. > >> - Is it ok to do it ? (if i'm correct there is a minor abi change and >> this could be a strong reason to stay as is) > > It is a huge ABI breakage for arches with 64-bit longs and 32-bit > time_t's (these seem to be only alpha, and i386 and powerpc with the > not-really-supported correctly-sized longs). These could be ifdefed > like arm already is (ugh). > > It is a minor API breakage/fix. > > Bruce This is a little portability issue. I noticed it while working on an app targetting both 6 and 7. I wasn't 100% sure of the consequences. I now am and you're right : this is a minor API fix and a big API break. This is no game to play and I'll live with it. Thanks for your answer.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47573E4F.9070403>