From: "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@gentoo.org>
To: Wookey <wookey@wookware.org>, Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>,
Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, binutils@sourceware.org,
gcc@gcc.gnu.org, config-patches@gnu.org,
distributions@lists.linux.dev, devel@lists.fedoraproject.org,
glaubitz@debian.org, maskray@google.com,
dickey@invisible-island.net, toolchain@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: Proposed CHOST change for the 64bit time_t transition
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 23:54:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2398337.iZASKD2KPV@noumea> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <edbc4f0b-69bc-4c93-a46a-0e3cf2d82b3e@cs.ucla.edu>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1999 bytes --]
Am Donnerstag, 5. September 2024, 20:20:32 CEST schrieb Paul Eggert:
> On 2024-09-05 10:03, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> > at least time64 implies largefile, so that will get sorted as side
> > effect.
>
> Right, but this means the "t" in "t64" is somewhat misleading, as it's
> not just about time: it also affects off_t, ino_t, etc., effects that
> are in some cases more important than the time_t effects. It may well be
> a good idea to use a different suffix, to remind non-experts about these
> other issues. How about "wsi" for "wider system integers"? E.g.,
> i686-pc-linux-gnuwsi.
... or -gnutf64 (for time and files)?
No objections against such variations in principle, just we should keep it
as simple and straightforward as possible then.
> Is the plan to call these APIs XXXt64 or XXXwsi forever, even after the
> year 2038? For example, will i686-pc-linux-gnu be withdrawn in a few years?
I'd expect that all the 32bit linux variants will slowly sink into obscurity.
(By 2038, we're probably more concerned with the 64bit to 128bit transition.)
Apart from that, I see no real need for further change later on.
> How would you deal with the problem that i686-pc-linux-gnu would mean
> one thing in Gentoo and something else in Debian? (This was what I was
> hinting at when I suggested adding a suffix for 32-bit time_t instead of
> for 64-bit.)
Well, of course I would hope that I can still convince them that tacking on t64
makes sense. After all, it's easy for them now. ;) Otherwise...
Following the logic of riscv versus riscv64 versus riscv32, one could come up
with a "global" definition of
* t64 suffix = 64bit time and lfs
* no suffix = can be either, your fault for not being informative, distro default
* t32 suffix = 32bit time (and ...?)
--
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfridge@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer
(council, comrel, toolchain, base-system, perl, libreoffice)
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:Dilfridge
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-05 21:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-04 15:48 Proposed CHOST change for the 64bit time_t transition Andreas K. Huettel
2024-09-05 0:32 ` Oskari Pirhonen
2024-09-05 2:06 ` Wookey
2024-09-05 3:10 ` Khem Raj
2024-09-05 13:50 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2024-09-05 15:39 ` Paul Eggert
2024-09-05 16:33 ` Todd Vierling
2024-09-05 16:59 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2024-09-05 17:03 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2024-09-05 18:20 ` Paul Eggert
2024-09-05 21:54 ` Andreas K. Huettel [this message]
2024-09-06 16:06 ` Arsen Arsenović
2024-09-07 0:24 ` Bruno Haible
2024-09-07 11:52 ` Arsen Arsenović
2024-09-07 0:16 ` Bruno Haible
2024-09-08 14:08 ` Arsen Arsenović
2024-09-08 23:42 ` Jacob Bachmeyer
2024-09-09 23:08 ` Arsen Arsenović
2024-09-10 10:16 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2024-09-10 14:11 ` Todd Vierling
2024-09-10 16:23 ` Florian Weimer
2024-09-05 16:39 ` Khem Raj
2024-09-05 13:49 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2024-09-07 12:32 ` Michał Górny
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2398337.iZASKD2KPV@noumea \
--to=dilfridge@gentoo.org \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=config-patches@gnu.org \
--cc=devel@lists.fedoraproject.org \
--cc=dickey@invisible-island.net \
--cc=distributions@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=eggert@cs.ucla.edu \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=glaubitz@debian.org \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=maskray@google.com \
--cc=raj.khem@gmail.com \
--cc=toolchain@gentoo.org \
--cc=wookey@wookware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox