Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 09:22:45 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: "B. Richardson" <rabtter@aye.net> Cc: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64-bit time_t Message-ID: <199808141526.JAA23467@lariat.lariat.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SGI.3.95.980814091311.18292A-100000@orion.aye.net> References: <199808141115.FAA21672@lariat.lariat.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I believe that Linux is already moving to a 64-bit time_t. The BSDs are behind. Maybe that's why there's resistance here (I can't figure out any LOGICAL reason for resisting this necessary change.) --Brett At 09:14 AM 8/14/98 -0400, B. Richardson wrote: > >Slightly out of thread, but .... do any 32 bit Unices have a 64 bit >time_t? I was under the impression (maybe wrongfully so) that they do not. > >- > >Barrett Richardson rabtter@orion.aye.net > >On Fri, 14 Aug 1998, Brett Glass wrote: > >> At 11:25 PM 8/13/98 +0000, Mike Smith wrote: >> >> >Funny, that's what Unix is. A big box full of tools. >> >> Many of which, due to legacy code, are redundant and cause >> unnecessary bloat and confusion. >> >> >Pick the right one for the job, and you'll bruise much less often. >> >> Make one more generally useful, and you won't have to root around >> hunting for the one (of dozens) that's exactly right. >> >> It's amazing the excuses people will make not to update their tools! >> I suppose this is why so much is still written in C, which is >> generally acknowledged to be a rusty tool without safety guards. >> >> --Brett >> >> >> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message >> > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199808141526.JAA23467>