From owner-freebsd-bugs Fri Oct 29 13:16:11 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from postal1.lbl.gov (postal1.lbl.gov [128.3.7.82]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE75614DA1 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:16:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jin@george.lbl.gov) Received: from SpamWall.lbl.gov (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by postal1.lbl.gov (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA18696 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:16:01 -0700 (PDT) From: jin@george.lbl.gov Received: from george.lbl.gov (george.lbl.gov [131.243.2.12]) by SpamWall.lbl.gov (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA18682; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:15:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from jin@localhost) by george.lbl.gov (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1) id NAA26997; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:15:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:15:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199910292015.NAA26997@george.lbl.gov> To: wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu Subject: Re: bin/14472: date for Y#K Cc: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG, sheldonh@uunet.co.za Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org < > What happens if we change the definition of _BSD_TIME_T to int64_t? > > Is it a performance issue or may it break an enormous things? > > Filesystems and many system calls break. It is just the time to wait at this point. We have 37 years before reaching that point :-) Because the Filesystems and system calls evntually will use int64_t soon, the rest issue for this case -- bin/14472 -- should be resolved when _BSD_TIME_T becomes type of int64_t or greater. So, I think we may close this case now. Thanks, -Jin To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message