This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Fifth draft of the Y2038 design document
- From: Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>
- To: Albert ARIBAUD <albert dot aribaud at 3adev dot fr>
- Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 13:39:35 -0500
- Subject: Re: Fifth draft of the Y2038 design document
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20170222090511.48be22ed.albert.aribaud@3adev.fr> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1702221647560.8704@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20170222194855.7581deca.albert.aribaud@3adev.fr> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1702222055440.24643@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20170223131634.06fa476c.albert.aribaud@3adev.fr> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1702231418320.15395@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20170223165052.1b494e3a.albert.aribaud@3adev.fr> <20170301081119.51cf96bb.albert.aribaud@3adev.fr>
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Albert ARIBAUD <albert.aribaud@3adev.fr> wrote:
> GLIBC needs to provide 64-bit-time clock_gettime to 32-bit code in
> various run-time cases:
>
> - above an 'old', only 32-bit-time, kernel;
> - above a 'new', mixed 64- and 32-bit-time, kernel;
> - above a 'newer', only 64-bit time, kernel.
Is it really necessary to support 'old' kernels? That seems like it
would add a great deal of complexity with no actual benefit.
zw