From owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 16 14:55:14 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C07FD16A4CE for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:55:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (209-128-86-226.bayarea.net [209.128.86.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98C6643D1F for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:55:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) Received: from dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net [192.168.4.201]) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1GMt8OE057486; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:55:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@piii.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: from dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i1GMt7ji016762; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:55:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net) Received: (from marcel@localhost) by dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i1GMt7Ge016761; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:55:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marcel) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 14:55:07 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar To: Ken Smith Message-ID: <20040216225507.GB16645@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> References: <20040216214653.GB23832@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040216214653.GB23832@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 64-bit time_t snapshot? X-BeenThere: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the Sparc List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 22:55:14 -0000 On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 04:46:53PM -0500, Ken Smith wrote: > > After 5.2.1-RELEASE is loaded on ftp-master I could try doing a > snapshot build for sparc64 that has the 64-bit time_t stuff incorporated > into it. That way *if* someone trashes a machine trying to do the > upgrade (by all reports Garance's instructions are really good :-) > they could load off this snapshot instead of off 5.2.1-RELEASE and > re-attempting the upgrade. > > Does this seem worth doing? Yes, definitely. It gives people a chance to move forward rather than to revert. > I could see about providing the same basic > set of packages that normally come on disc1 pre-built on a 64-bit time_t > system as part of this. Normally portmgr@ does the package builds > for the releases so I haven't needed to do any of those yet but I > think I know how... I wouldn't worry about that too much. It's probably more confusing to provide 64-bit time_t packages alongside the official packages. I would suggest we push for making the 64-bit time_t official and let the package stuff sort itself out automaticly. > If this is worth doing, any thoughts on whether it would be best to > base it on 5.2.1-RELEASE (plus just the time_t change) or would it > be better to try and catch a -current that seems stable? I would go for -current. That way any preparatory commits (like the realclean target) do not have to be backported. > The release > building procedure I've been doing needs to suck everything out of a > CVS repo as it builds the release so I'd need to freeze a copy of the > repo and add in the time_t change to it locally for this snapshot build. A timestamp (pick feb 13 :-) does the trick nicely. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net