From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Oct 28 18:30: 5 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mass.dis.org (mass.dis.org [216.240.45.41]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C617537B405; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 18:30:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mass.dis.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mass.dis.org (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f9T2h2c04281; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 18:43:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from msmith@mass.dis.org) Message-Id: <200110290243.f9T2h2c04281@mass.dis.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: obrien@FreeBSD.org Cc: John Baldwin , Matthew Dillon , arch@FreeBSD.org, Mike Smith Subject: Re: time_t not to change size on x86 In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 28 Oct 2001 17:17:54 PST." <20011028171754.F32015@dragon.nuxi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 18:43:02 -0800 From: Mike Smith 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 > On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 02:39:24AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > I think changing the 386 would be the wrong thing to do. At the very > > least, it should be changed last. First change the 64-bit archs to use > > a 64-bit time_t (i..e., make time_t a 'long'). > > Alpha should be changed when i386 is. This is part of the point in using 'long'; there's an implicit assumption that the Alpha, long our 64-bit testbed will bear the brunt of the confusion in the early stages of the migration. Being an Alpha supporter has never been easy. 8( -- ... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his rivals and unfortunately opponents also. But not because people want to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force people to take different points of view. [Dr. Fritz Todt] V I C T O R Y N O T V E N G E A N C E To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message