From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Oct 26 16:46:39 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F77237B403 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2001 16:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by flood.ping.uio.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id AA43714C2E; Sat, 27 Oct 2001 01:46:29 +0200 (CEST) X-URL: http://www.ofug.org/~des/ X-Disclaimer: The views expressed in this message do not necessarily coincide with those of any organisation or company with which I am or have been affiliated. To: Bakul Shah Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp , Peter Wemm , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. References: <200110262321.TAA14697@ajax.cnchost.com> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 27 Oct 2001 01:46:29 +0200 In-Reply-To: <200110262321.TAA14697@ajax.cnchost.com> Message-ID: Lines: 36 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Bakul Shah writes: > I don't want to have to change a bunch of exiting programs > just because someone decided change time_t to a 64 bit > quantity. That is why I would really prefer a new typename > for a 64 time type. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no and no. I'm almost insulted that you (and others) seem to be arguing from the premise that us effwit FreeBSD committers are too stupid to realize we need to provide an upgrade path. Give us some effing credit. > For file timestamps nstime64_t seems adequate to me for reasons > I gave before -- may be mtime/atime/utime type should not be > called time_t either. Obviously. After all, nobody uses time_t for anything else that file timestamps - at least nobody we care about (or will care about in 2038), so there's no need for ctime(), difftime(), gmtime(), localtime(), mktime(), time(), timelocal() or timegm() to continue working as before. > Also, this is problem is not peculiar to FreeBSD and I really > hope you (core) guys try to come to some consensus with other > OS groups. Since you're so stuck up about standardization, go see POSIX or SUSv2 or the Austin spec and show me a single reference to "nstime64_t" in any one of those documents. I will not discuss this any further. It's too much like teaching pigs to sing. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message