Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 17:14:18 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <dev-null@NUXI.com> To: Jim Pirzyk <Jim.Pirzyk@disney.com> Cc: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.ORG>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: time_t not to change size on x86 Message-ID: <20011028171418.D32015@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <3BDB103F.763377D@disney.com>; from Jim.Pirzyk@disney.com on Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 12:51:28PM -0700 References: <200110270636.f9R6aik43419@apollo.backplane.com> <20011027064343.03830380A@overcee.netplex.com.au> <20011027124149.A486@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <3BDB103F.763377D@disney.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 12:51:28PM -0700, Jim Pirzyk wrote: > > I too agree that we should change time_t on the 64bit > > platforms and leave the i386 platform alone. Since people are resisting moving i386 to a 64-bit time_t, only the Alpha users should be able to vote what happens on their platform. Matt Dillon has found bugs where code assumed sizeof(time_t) == sizeof(int), which was benign on the i386, would have been deadly on the Alpha. And this is *precisely* why I have fought to keep the Alpha's time_t the same size as the i386's. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org) 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?20011028171418.D32015>