[PATCH] Disable year 2038 support on 32-bit hosts by default

Luis Machado luis.machado@arm.com
Mon Aug 8 12:04:58 GMT 2022


On 8/8/22 12:58, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2022 12:34:02 +0100
>> Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, binutils@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>> From: Luis Machado <luis.machado@arm.com>
>>
>> On 8/2/22 07:42, Luis Machado via Gdb-patches wrote:
>>> On 8/1/22 16:59, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>>>> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 11:37:27 -0400
>>>>> From: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> My opinion would be to follow the trend and use 64-bit everywhere, and
>>>>> not have to worry about future-proofing anymore.
>>>>
>>>> That's not possible everywhere, though.
>>>>
>>>> And I very much doubt that time has come for us to worry about the
>>>> year 2038.  Does anyone believe GDB 13 will still be used in that
>>>> year?
>>>
>>> I doubt it. There was some discussion here:
>>>
>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/bug-gnulib@gnu.org/msg41057.html
>>>
>>> I'm cc-ing Paul Eggert for additional considerations about this, but at the moment it seems the safest
>>> is to just use 32-bit time_t for 32-bit hosts. There were some concerns about breaking compatibility if
>>> we moved to 64-bit time_t on 32-bit hosts.
>>>
>>> Maybe the best course of action is to get autoconf patched to support year2038 checks and then use that
>>> in binutils-gdb.
>>
>> Any additional thoughts on this one?
> 
> What is the current plan if no one else chimes in?

I'd like to push this temporary fix in so we can at least have a functional 32-bit Arm GDB on 32-bit hosts supporting
64-bit time_t. I expect other 32-bit GDB's will also potentially run into this.


More information about the Binutils mailing list