64btt cvsup?

[Ken Smith]

On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 12:20:33PM -0800, John Polstra wrote:

> <ADVICE COST=0>

Advice greatly appreciated.

> All of a sudden, without any warning, the time() call is likely to
> start scribbling a 0 into either "a" or "b" -- or, worse yet, into
> half of the return address or frame pointer.  Who knows what the
> symptoms of that will be?  Will they be deterministic?  Will they
> cause ugly security vulnerabilities?  Whee!

I think this is why we might be able to get away with not providing
the compatibility stuff - this part isn't quite true.  Users can't
do a normal upgrade path (cvsup to -current, make buildworld/etc)
and get to a 64-bit time_t system.  If you try to do an upgrade through
the normal path you break your machine at that point.  To make it to
a 64-bit time_t system without breaking your system you need to follow
Garance's instructions and use his tools to do the upgrade.  So there
kinda is a warning.

Does that help any, or is this still a huge mistake?

-- 
						Ken Smith
- From there to here, from here to      |       kensmith at cse.buffalo.edu
  there, funny things are everywhere.   |
                      - Theodore Geisel |