Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:16:47 -0500 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> To: John Hein <jhein@timing.com> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 64 bit time_t Message-ID: <20080916211646.GA35778@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> In-Reply-To: <18640.5196.580629.632590@gromit.timing.com> References: <18640.5196.580629.632590@gromit.timing.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--PEIAKu/WMn1b1Hv9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 02:17:16PM -0600, John Hein wrote: > Other than recompiling for -current users (and not being an MFC-able > change and possibly breaking a gazillion unfortunately written ports), > are their any other issues with switching to 64 bit time_t for i386? > I suppose compat libs are a bit dicey. Off hand: every syscall that takes a time_t or a structure containing a time_t would have to be reimplemented and a compatability version provided in the old location. The same would be true of every similar function in the libc symbol map. A number of ioctl's and sysctl would probably need to grow compatability interfaces as well. -- Brooks --PEIAKu/WMn1b1Hv9 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFI0CI+XY6L6fI4GtQRAiCgAKDRrCB/zMXZnax/OXKR/g979hrUIwCgmo7y MdQtWAMGVKUqyiOaUBmmM5I= =LXp3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --PEIAKu/WMn1b1Hv9--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080916211646.GA35778>