From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Aug 14 10:16:59 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA00253 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Fri, 14 Aug 1998 10:16:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mail1.its.rpi.edu (mail1.its.rpi.edu [128.113.100.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA00235 for ; Fri, 14 Aug 1998 10:16:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from drosih@rpi.edu) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.acs.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by mail1.its.rpi.edu (8.8.8/8.8.6) with ESMTP id NAA105584; Fri, 14 Aug 1998 13:15:57 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: drosih@pop1.rpi.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199808141526.JAA23467@lariat.lariat.org> References: <199808141115.FAA21672@lariat.lariat.org> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 13:19:53 -0400 To: Brett Glass , "B. Richardson" From: Garance A Drosihn Subject: Re: 64-bit time_t Cc: Mike Smith , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 9:22 AM -0600 8/14/98, Brett Glass wrote: > 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.) Just that it's work, and it's work which does not need to be done right this second (so to speak). It will most likely be somewhat disruptive work. Perhaps we should consider it for FreeBSD 4.0, because (IMO) it does seem like a good thing to do "sometime". But right now we have other projects we should concentrate on and finish off (IMO) before opening this one up. (elf, SMP, perl5, softupdates, etc) --- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or drosih@rpi.edu Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message