Reasons for 64-bTT & DHCP import

Garance A Drosihn drosih at rpi.edu
Sun Mar 14 18:38:34 PST 2004


At 9:20 PM +0100 3/14/04, Roderick van Domburg wrote:
>Hello everyone,
>
>Thank your for the excellent documentation that comes with the
>64-bTT change. I am following it on my Enterprise 250 as we speak.

Hopefully you'll still be happy with it after you're done...  :-)

>Probably a Real Stupid question, but why hasn't __time_t been a
>__int64_t from the beginning?  I'm asking out of sheer curiosity
>and insight in development.

I think it was just that both i386 and alpha had 32-bit time_t's,
so it seemed reasonable to stick with that for sparc64.  Later on,
the ia64 and amd64 ports started up, and they decided to go with
64-bTT.  After thinking about that a little, it seemed like we
might as well switch to 64-bTT for sparc64 right now, instead of
waiting for when the i386 and alpha ports will switch.

Also, I think we initially hoped that "5.x-stable" was going to
happen much sooner than it did.  And given our original hopes for
that schedule, it seemed better to go with the 32-bTT that we were
already familiar with.

>Also, I am curious why we're not importing ISC DHCP 3 in the
>base system.  Skimming over the ISC license, I don't see any
>direct issues. Once again: don't mean to bash, just curious.

This one I don't know about.  I'm lucky enough that my sparc64
machine does not have to use dhcp at all...  :-)

-- 
Garance Alistair Drosehn            =   gad at gilead.netel.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer           or  gad at freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute    or  drosih at rpi.edu


More information about the freebsd-sparc64 mailing list