Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 13:15:05 -0700 (MST) From: "Chad R. Larson" <chad@DCFinc.com> To: dmitry@ssimicro.com Cc: dillon@earth.backplane.com, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Re[2]: time_t definition is worng Message-ID: <200106012015.NAA17134@freeway.dcfinc.com> In-Reply-To: <149413595408.20010601130059@ssimicro.com> from "Dmitry V. Dvoinikov" at "Jun 1, 1 01:00:59 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As I recall, Dmitry V. Dvoinikov wrote: >> Matt Dillon: >> time_t should remain 'long' on IA32 (even though sizeof(int) == >> sizeof(long) on IA32), and it damn well should be 'long' on Alpha ... > > I believe you are wrong. If it's "long" on both i386 and Alpha, > data will not be binary compatible. > > In fact as far as I understand, the origin of this confusion > is making sizeof(int) == sizeof(long) on i386, which is kind of a stretchy. From the commit log: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= revision 1.25 date: 2001/05/18 01:43:25; author: obrien; state: Exp; lines: +2 -2 Make _BSD_TIME_T_ (time_t) an `int' rather than `long'. This will help flag errors where programmers assume time_t is a long, which it is not on 64-bit platforms. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Well, time_t may or not be a "long", depending on your platform. But it sure as hell is 64-bits. Back out the revision. -crl -- Chad R. Larson (CRL15) 602-953-1392 Brother, can you paradigm? chad@dcfinc.com chad@larsons.org larson1@home.com DCF, Inc. - 14623 North 49th Place, Scottsdale, Arizona 85254-2207 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?200106012015.NAA17134>