PowerPC 64-bit time_t

[Justin Hibbits]

This would only be needed if syscall ABI compatibility is required,  
right?  Considering the current support state and userbase of powerpc,  
a simple binary option of 32 vs 64 should be sufficient, I believe.   
For i386 it's a different story, since it's much more widely used (and  
tier1) so backwards compatibility is 100% necessary.

- Justin

On Jun 9, 2016, at 3:37 PM, Doug Rabson wrote:

> Well you have to maintain the kernel's syscall ABI, which basically  
> means adding new syscalls for anything which is affected.
>
> On 9 June 2016 at 13:41, Justin Hibbits <jhibbits at freebsd.org> wrote:
> At the devsummit earlier today I mentioned for FreeBSD 12 wanting 64- 
> bit time_t across the board.  It was pointed out that the only ones  
> with 32-bit time_t are i386 and powerpc (32-bit).  I've made the  
> changes necessary for at least kernel (world is still building right  
> now), but it's obviously an ABI and KBI incompatible change.   
> Addressing KBI is a nonissue, as that's expected to break at major  
> releases.  ABI is another issue.  I'm unsure how to properly address  
> ABI breakage -- bumping libc's .so version, or reversion all symbols  
> that use something with time_t, or something else.  If I can address  
> it before the code freeze, it could be done for FreeBSD 11, which  
> leaves about 6 hours from now.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> - Justin
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-arch at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch- 
> unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>