From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Eggert Subject: Re: The time(2) man page conflicts with glibc Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 15:05:26 -0800 Message-ID: <5671EE36.1000402@cs.ucla.edu> References: <5671696B.3070203@gmail.com> <56717032.7000007@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: To: Zack Weinberg , "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Cc: "H.J. Lu" , Andreas Schwab , libc-alpha , linux-man , Mike Frysinger List-Id: linux-man@vger.kernel.org Zack Weinberg wrote: > When `t` is NULL, the call cannot fail. This doesn't make it clear what happens when the time_t values roll around after the year 2038, on 32-bit time_t hosts. How about adding some further text along the following lines? In GNU/Linux time(NULL) cannot fail with errno == EOVERFLOW, even on ABIs where time_t is a signed 32-bit integer and when the clock ticks past the time 2**31 (2038-01-19 03:14:08 UTC, ignoring leap seconds). Instead, the behavior is undefined when the system time is out of time_t range. Applications intended to run after 2038 should use ABIs with time_t wider than 32 bits.