From owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 16 13:46:55 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12FBE16A4CE for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 13:46:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU [128.205.32.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C21C443D31 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 13:46:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kensmith@cse.Buffalo.EDU) Received: from electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (kensmith@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i1GLkrTr024599 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:46:53 -0500 (EST) Received: (from kensmith@localhost) by electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (8.12.10/8.12.9/Submit) id i1GLkrUj024598 for freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:46:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:46:53 -0500 From: Ken Smith To: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20040216214653.GB23832@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Subject: 64-bit time_t snapshot? X-BeenThere: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the Sparc List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:46:55 -0000 I mentioned this to Garance and we talked about it a little bit but I'm not sure if we decided one way or another if this is worth doing. After 5.2.1-RELEASE is loaded on ftp-master I could try doing a snapshot build for sparc64 that has the 64-bit time_t stuff incorporated into it. That way *if* someone trashes a machine trying to do the upgrade (by all reports Garance's instructions are really good :-) they could load off this snapshot instead of off 5.2.1-RELEASE and re-attempting the upgrade. Does this seem worth doing? I could see about providing the same basic set of packages that normally come on disc1 pre-built on a 64-bit time_t system as part of this. Normally portmgr@ does the package builds for the releases so I haven't needed to do any of those yet but I think I know how... If this is worth doing, any thoughts on whether it would be best to base it on 5.2.1-RELEASE (plus just the time_t change) or would it be better to try and catch a -current that seems stable? The release building procedure I've been doing needs to suck everything out of a CVS repo as it builds the release so I'd need to freeze a copy of the repo and add in the time_t change to it locally for this snapshot build. Thanks. -- Ken Smith - From there to here, from here to | kensmith@cse.buffalo.edu there, funny things are everywhere. | - Theodore Geisel |