Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 09:20:15 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>, arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: time_t not to change size on x86 Message-ID: <3BDC3E4F.A8C0A3F3@mindspring.com> References: <20011027070109.D02E9380A@overcee.netplex.com.au> <200110272007.f9RK7NG88372@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <200110272029.f9RKTIi56468@apollo.backplane.com> <200110272049.f9RKn9K88676@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <200110272056.f9RKuiZ64324@apollo.backplane.com> <200110272110.f9RLAeW91039@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <200110272116.f9RLGeg64445@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Dillon wrote: > Garrett, are you seriously suggesting that we remove long int > and change off_t back to 32 bits? Because if you aren't this > argument doesn't hold any water for not converting time_t. > > What does C99 say? The requirements for time_t are different than those for off_t, which is not even noted at all by C90. I personally don't know what C99 says, but that's OK, since you can't get a compiler for it anyway. -- Terry 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?3BDC3E4F.A8C0A3F3>