[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190812175556.GT9017@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 13:55:56 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: libc-alpha@...rceware.org
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: time64 abi choices for glibc and musl
On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 01:58:08PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> Note: this email is to glibc list and particularly seeking feedback
> from glibc folks, but CC'd to musl list as well.
>
> As far as I can tell, most time64 work/discussion on the glibc side so
> far has been about implementation mechanisms and symbol-binding ABI
> aspects, and one aspect that doesn't seem to have been addressed is
> making good choices about the actual types involved. Some of them have
> been done:
>
> struct timespec (endian-matching padding)
> struct timeval (64-bit suseconds_t)
> struct itimerspec, itimerval, utimbuf, timeb (obvious definitions)
>
> but I haven't seen a clear proposal with rationale for the choices in
> defining:
>
> struct stat
> struct msqid_ds, semid_ds, shmid_ds (sysvipc)
> struct rusage
> struct timex
> struct utmp[x]
>
> [...]
The wiki at https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Y2038ProofnessDesign
does not seem to cover any of this issue, and the two branch links
that should shed light on the types seem to be down/deleted:
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=log;h=refs/heads/aaribaud/y2038-2.26
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=log;h=refs/heads/aaribaud/y2038-2.26-rfc-2
I'm guessing the following is the current one that should be linked
instead, no?
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=log;h=refs/heads/aaribaud/y2038
Rich
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.
