Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:50:53 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: sparc64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: time_t on sparc64 Message-ID: <20031014225053.GA59096@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <20031015045429.Q41837@gamplex.bde.org> References: <20031013153219.H45269@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20031014103446.U45269@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20031015045429.Q41837@gamplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 05:28:08AM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote: > > > > I guess we have to do this work before 2038, don't we? If we don't do it > > before 5.2 we have to stick with this until 6.0. Correct? > > Yes. > > It is too late to change it for 5.n IMO. Every syscall that uses a time_t > or a timeval would need to be duplicated. I'd rather we create a new sysent and prune the syscalls to get rid of other compatibility cruft. It also allows us change userland visible structures to make them more LP64 friendly. BTW: time_t on ia64 is already 64 bit. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031014225053.GA59096>