Back to the Future - 64-bit time_t on sparc64

Garance A Drosihn drosih at
Sat Feb 21 10:59:20 PST 2004

At 2:07 PM +0100 2/21/04, Harti Brandt wrote:
>GAD>I *think* what would work is something like:
>GAD>In /etc/make.conf, users would define:
>GAD>If neither is defined, than 32-bit is assumed.
>That would look like an option to build either way and I think
>we shouldn't have such an option that allows 32bit time_t's.
>This will require to ship to sets of packages and will give as
>a lot of bug reports because of mismatched packages and kernels.

Well, I was just giving a basic idea of something we could do,
I did not mean to imply this is all we would ever do.  This
would just be a transition aid, and like all transition aids
it would eventually disappear.

Initially, I think we DO want to allow 32-bit builds.  But then,
after a week or two, we would simply change the script to say:

      "I'm sorry dave,
       but I can't let you do 32-bit builds anymore".

Why do we want to allow 32-bit builds?
Because the instructions say:
        First do a 32-bit build.  Install it.
        Once you know that that installation is working,
        Change _types.h, do a 64-bit build, and install that.

>GAD> I am certain that there are some details I have overlooked, but
>GAD> I really don't have the time to think it through right now.

I probably should have *started* my message by emphasizing this part
more strongly.  I think the low-level details are workable, but some
developer would have to sit down and think them out.  That is what I
do not have the time to do.

Also keep in mind that whatever we do for 5.x-current, we will
also have users who are sticking on 5.2.1-security until 5.2-
release comes out.  It would be nice if they also had a way to
make a smooth transition, without the risk of shooting their
foot off...

Garance Alistair Drosehn            =   gad at
Senior Systems Programmer           or  gad at
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute    or  drosih at

More information about the freebsd-sparc64 mailing list