Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 09:06:38 +0200 (CEST) From: Harti Brandt <brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> Cc: sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: time_t on sparc64 Message-ID: <20031015090422.M57857@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> In-Reply-To: <20031014225053.GA59096@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> References: <20031013153219.H45269@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20031015045429.Q41837@gamplex.bde.org> <20031014225053.GA59096@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: MM>On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 05:28:08AM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: MM>> > MM>> > I guess we have to do this work before 2038, don't we? If we don't do it MM>> > before 5.2 we have to stick with this until 6.0. Correct? MM>> MM>> Yes. MM>> MM>> It is too late to change it for 5.n IMO. Every syscall that uses a time_t MM>> or a timeval would need to be duplicated. MM> MM>I'd rather we create a new sysent and prune the syscalls to get rid of MM>other compatibility cruft. It also allows us change userland visible MM>structures to make them more LP64 friendly. MM> MM>BTW: time_t on ia64 is already 64 bit. Hmm. In this case it should be rather easy to change sparc64's time_t to 64bit? The only changes should be in MD code (in theory). But this would clearly break existing installations, so I guess we'd rather wait until the fork of 6. harti -- harti brandt, http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/research/cc/cats/employees/hartmut.brandt/private brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de, harti@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031015090422.M57857>