This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [Y2038] Question regarding support of old time interfaces beyond y2038
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Lukasz Majewski <lukma at denx dot de>
- Cc: Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb dot de>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 19:20:43 +0000
- Subject: Re: [Y2038] Question regarding support of old time interfaces beyond y2038
- References: <20190305162351.5aadde66@jawa> <CAKCAbMjiW8=X1u8nm6nEkAz+MyF=msN97Fr59=v01HbHb=U6UA@mail.gmail.com> <20190307085329.2b6cbeb7@jawa>
On Thu, 7 Mar 2019, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> > 1) We should be clear that most of these will continue to be supported
> > as C library interfaces even if they are not system calls. Some of
> > them are obsolete enough and/or rarely used enough that we might not
> > bother (the older ways to set the system clock, for instance).
>
> The question here is about the decision if even the old time APIs shall
> be supported on 32 bit systems which are going to be Y2038 proof (like
> the 'stime').
The glibc API should support the same set of functions both with and
without _TIME_BITS=64.
I think it would be reasonable to obsolete the stime function in glibc
(meaning turn it into a compat symbol, not available for linking new
programs and not present at all for new architectures). But that's
orthogonal to supporting 64-bit times on 32-bit platforms in glibc. If
stime is obsoleted before (or in the same release as) that 64-bit time
support, no 64-bit version of stime is needed in glibc. If obsoleted in a
later release, glibc would need to get a 64-bit version (and both versions
would turn into compat symbols if the interface is obsoleted).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com