Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 27 Oct 2001 12:41:49 -0700
From:      Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>
To:        Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>
Cc:        Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.ORG>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: time_t not to change size on x86
Message-ID:  <20011027124149.A486@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>
In-Reply-To: <20011027064343.03830380A@overcee.netplex.com.au>
References:  <200110270636.f9R6aik43419@apollo.backplane.com> <20011027064343.03830380A@overcee.netplex.com.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 11:43:42PM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
> Matthew Dillon wrote:
> > 
> > :Just to clarify, based on Peter's last mail.
> > :
> > :The proposal is not to change the size of time_t on x86, merely to
> > :select a suitable size on new platforms so that we migrate in a
> > :suitable fashion.
> > :
> > :This is fine, and a sensible idea.
> > 
> >     No, the current proposal... the one that has the most support (even if
> >     you discount me), is that we do not change time_t in 4.x, but in 
> >     5.x we change it to a 64 bit integer on all platforms (including IA32).
> 
> To be clear, I absolutely DO NOT support this.

Since we're counting votes: I too think we should leave the i386 alone.

Changing time_t to long is a good "first step". Cross-platform
inconsistencies (ie on-disk structures) are a preliminary to
what we can expect if we do want to change the i386 *and*
maintain backward compatibility. So, let's deal with that in
a less destructive environment. If people still think we should
move the i386 to a 64-bit time_t after we've dealed with the
64-bit archs, they can do so at their leasure, knowing that the
road has been paved enough that you don't need off-road vehicles
to cross the terrain. Personally I doubt it will be necessary...

In the mean time, being able to use %ld for time_t is *very*
convenient and truly MI.

So: One step at a time, guys. Leave the i386 alone. If there's ever
a need for making the switch on i386 (which I doubt) we can do that
just as well at a later time, with a lot more insight than we have
now...

IMO; Let it be known. I step out of the discussion again.

-- 
 Marcel Moolenaar	  USPA: A-39004		 marcel@xcllnt.net

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011027124149.A486>