Re: 64-bit time_t on sparc64, epilogue(?)

From: Harti Brandt (brandt_at_fokus.fraunhofer.de)
Date: 11/15/03

  • Next message: Terry Lambert: "Re: __TIME_MIN/__TIME_MAX" 
    Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 16:06:36 +0100 (CET)
To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>

    On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Garance A Drosihn wrote:

    GAD>At 11:35 PM -0700 11/14/03, Scott Long wrote:
    GAD>>Garance A Drosihn wrote:
    GAD>>>Recently on the freebsd-sparc64 list, it was mentioned
    GAD>>>that it would be nice to upgrade time_t on that port to
    GAD>>>be 64-bit.
    GAD> [...mumble mumble...]
    GAD>
    GAD>>>So, I thought I'd explicitly say that I don't think we
    GAD>>>should make the change this late in the game..
    GAD>>
    GAD>>Switching to 64-bit time_t this late in the 5.2 cycle will
    GAD>>likely cause more excitement than we can handle. ...
    GAD>>...Why don't we put this on the TODO list for 5.3, and
    GAD>>plan to do it in early January, assuming that Jake and
    GAD>>Thomas are ok with it.
    GAD>
    GAD>Personally I am inclined to think that we have to stop
    GAD>making ABI/API changes to 5.x or we will never ever get
    GAD>to "5.x-stable". It would be nice if 5.2 were the last
    GAD>set of API/ABI changes, so that people who install it can
    GAD>at least have a painless upgrade to 5.3-release (which
    GAD>will hopefully be 5.x-stable).
    GAD>
    GAD>However, I really would like to see the 64-bit time_t
    GAD>happen, and I'm certainly willing to help out (as time
    GAD>permits) if we were to make this change on sparc64 in
    GAD>early January. I'll even start testing such changes on
    GAD>my own sparc64 system during the code-freeze for 5.2.
    GAD>
    GAD>[however, it takes about 11 hours for build/installworld
    GAD>on my system, so there's a limit to how much I can test!]
    GAD>
    GAD>Certainly it's more important to get make-release and
    GAD>kse-for-sparc64 working for 5.2-release than it is to
    GAD>make this time_t change.

    I'm running one of my two sparcs since then without any problem with
    64-bit time_t (I don't have many ports on it - perl, bash, a dozen or so).
    I was waiting for thomas and jake to say something on this. Also someone
    wanted to test it, but I did not here from him. I think that Scott is
    right, it's too late for 5.2 but we should definitely try to do it for
    5.3. The biggest problem is getting the upgrade process right, but this
    should be manageable.

    harti 

    -- 
harti brandt,
http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/research/cc/cats/employees/hartmut.brandt/private
brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de, harti@freebsd.org
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
  • Next message: Terry Lambert: "Re: __TIME_MIN/__TIME_MAX"
    • Quantcast