Re: RFD: x32 ABI system call numbers

[Alan Cox]

On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 12:44:04 -0700
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 08/31/2011 12:18 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>
> >> You do realize that there are probably quite a lot of programs that
> >> depend on signed time_t because they really do care about dates before
> >> 1970?
> > 
> > Yes, it already occurred to me after I had written the above that we
> > really want it to be signed, especially to allow a meaningful conversion
> > at least one-way between 32 and 64 bit time_t values.
> > 
> 
> The only reason I mentioned redefining 32-bit time_t as unsigned was for
> *legacy ABIs*.

But if you redefine it then it's not a legacy ABI any more - its a new
ABI. Might as well just cause the pain. 64bit has already done much of
the cleaning up.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/