Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 09:53:33 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. Message-ID: <3BD9950D.BB72A8F9@mindspring.com> References: <3463.1004114334@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > I am looking for it at this time, not _for_ this time, but _for_ > the future. > > If state of the art equipment can break the make(1) assumption today, > what do you think the life expectancy of the designed concept is ? > > Certainly not 10+ years. > > And have you considered that there may be other and stronger > requirements than make(1) and that multi-cpu, multi-threaded systems > may push the envelope ? > > Solving the problem means going for a timestamp which can resolve > any conceiveable CPU frequencies for all relevant future. You can alternately resolve this problem by forcing the timestamp to be monotonically increasing, FWIW. This means that you might push the timestamp into the future by several *gasp* nanoseconds, but it would guarantee that a very fast system would maintain dependency order correctly for generated files for make. This could be done in the FS, without any ugly hacks... -- 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?3BD9950D.BB72A8F9>