Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 13:57:47 +0300 From: Valentin Nechayev <netch@iv.nn.kiev.ua> To: "Antoine Beaupre (LMC)" <Antoine.Beaupre@ericsson.ca> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: time_t definition is worng Message-ID: <20010603135747.B1343@iv.nn.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <3B180082.B315A682@lmc.ericsson.se>; from Antoine.Beaupre@ericsson.ca on Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 04:52:18PM -0400 References: <20010601135122.A66182@sunbay.com> <Pine.BSF.4.33_heb2.09.0106011437410.43119-100000@active.ath.cx> <20010601044526.A30739@xor.obsecurity.org> <200106011839.f51Idbj86306@earth.backplane.com> <3B180082.B315A682@lmc.ericsson.se>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 16:52:18, Antoine.Beaupre (Antoine Beaupre (LMC)) wrote about "Re: time_t definition is worng": > Why not make leave it a long on alpha (and IA64) and make it a 'long > long' on IA32 so that we get rid of the Y38 bug right now? ;) It will break ABI compatilibity in too many places. Most of them can be reduced to new syscalls (at least: wait4, stat, lstat, fstat, setitimer, getitimer, select, getrusage, settimeofday, gettimeofday, utimes, adjtime, futimes, poll...), structure content retranslation code in obsolete syscalls implementations, major version bump for almost all shared libraries... Because deadline will be in 2038, I don't think FreeBSD staff will do such changes before 2020.;| (Are you sure unix systems will exist yet another 20 years?) /netch To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010603135747.B1343>