[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1f99e482-5eaf-34e0-b2ec-025f0b4f4078@adelielinux.org>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 17:36:43 -0500
From: "A. Wilcox" <awilfox@...lielinux.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: time_t assessment of what needs to be done
On 07/01/19 15:11, Rich Felker wrote:
> The utmp structure has just enough reserved space to move ut_tv to the
> end and make it unconditionally 64-bit-time_t. This is also nice for
> mixed 32/64-bit systems. Of course musl's utmp stuff is nopped out
> anyway but the types should be fixed for users of third-party utmp
> tooling/libraries. Alternatively we could just change it, since it's
> not an app-libc ABI at this point as far as I can tell. Matching the
> current 64-bit layout might be more useful than changing both.
With my official distro hat on, I can say that we have no preference:
[quoting system/musl/APKBUILD]
# replaced by utmps - don't allow apps to sneak use of no-ops
rm "$pkgdir"/usr/include/utmp.h
rm "$pkgdir"/usr/include/utmpx.h
With my official distro hat off, I don't know if musl is trying to be
compatible with glibc ABI here as well. If so, you should see what
they're doing to the layout of the utmp structure, because most apps
will write the structure directly to the disk.
Best,
--arw
--
A. Wilcox (awilfox)
Project Lead, Adélie Linux
https://www.adelielinux.org
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
