Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 14:06:18 +0100 From: Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely8.cicely.de> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: illegal &time_t useage in /usr/src Message-ID: <20011028140618.A49388@cicely8.cicely.de> In-Reply-To: <33642.1004269374@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <20011028113509.A48670@cicely8.cicely.de> <33642.1004269374@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 12:42:54PM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <20011028113509.A48670@cicely8.cicely.de>, Bernd Walter writes: > >On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 11:38:56PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote: > > >But so far the discussion went completely to time_t only. > >What about struct timespec and struct timeval? > > We can't get rid of those, they API used. But still part of the original question. > >There is no functional need to have long defined tv_nsec and tv_usec > >fields as long as no spec says so. > > Right, I don't think anybody actually insisted on that. If time_t changes it's size struct timespec changes too. Why not correcting struct timespec.tv_nsec to int32_t in one turn? > >The tv_sec field on struct timeval would still be 32 bit on 32 bit > >platforms. > > You lost me there, I don't think that is mandated. Not mandated. It's simply part of the getting over 2038 thing. That said - I don't know which fields are forced to be long by standarts. -- B.Walter COSMO-Project http://www.cosmo-project.de ticso@cicely.de Usergroup info@cosmo-project.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011028140618.A49388>