Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 00:51:11 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> Cc: sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: time_t on sparc64 Message-ID: <20031015075111.GA52914@rot13.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20031015074437.GA60338@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> References: <20031013153219.H45269@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20031014103446.U45269@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20031015045429.Q41837@gamplex.bde.org> <20031014225053.GA59096@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <20031015090422.M57857@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20031015074437.GA60338@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--9amGYk9869ThD9tj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 12:44:37AM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > Yes. The MI code is already done and there's not much MD code that > is expected to break. It's mostly the structures that change. This > is especially painful on sparc64 because it's big-endian. I assume > that sparc64 passes syscall arguments in registers, so the syscalls > that take a time_t do not change except that there's no sign extension > prior to use. You can preserve the ABI until 2038 by ignoring the > upper 32-bits in that case. I'd much prefer we get it over with now before sparc64 gets widely deployed. It's going to be much more painful once there's an installed user base running production 5.x-STABLE systems. Kris --9amGYk9869ThD9tj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/jPxvWry0BWjoQKURAqyfAJ4+6W0qCOKmnJCGK0vL5O62lqf0KACgx7WM QR3DnnQe7HwhrFXAEOIKvGg= =ut9a -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9amGYk9869ThD9tj--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031015075111.GA52914>