From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS22989 209.51.188.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09E911F8C6 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2021 05:36:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:39636 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m1Mi3-0000tl-SN for normalperson@yhbt.net; Thu, 08 Jul 2021 01:36:27 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44922) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m1Mhz-0000sL-Sl for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Jul 2021 01:36:23 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:38961) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m1Mhv-0000BH-5f for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Jul 2021 01:36:21 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1625722577; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Uj8iSzf95T1naDYMoCfcTnM9GWoytnEMRZIj/psJFfg=; b=KO+9dIe2x5nKaCaY11uz9K1/v69gDALs1RJNrwrVuYxmHcJ5VqRdHcByfHqhsDcu3zUZBL cjVx5XlPfIoyKUBBQ5jehTY4Di8W7pLnBPYEeDEeVQMxP4UIpJna2HHAEsr1S4UY4L1rEe GCEclA/6vmbP3nUsyleK+reNgT8yIhk= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-576-n6ZesIeqOxeia-oVVt4lRw-1; Thu, 08 Jul 2021 01:36:15 -0400 X-MC-Unique: n6ZesIeqOxeia-oVVt4lRw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A849D800C78; Thu, 8 Jul 2021 05:36:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (ovpn-115-5.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.115.5]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DFE71981C; Thu, 8 Jul 2021 05:36:13 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Paul Eggert Subject: Re: [PATCH] year2038: support glibc 2.34 _TIME_BITS=64 References: <20210702023332.2482490-1-eggert@cs.ucla.edu> <4302797.ikRTjI96fm@omega> <87y2akltl7.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <1882389.maKspNx483@omega> <87eecabjhf.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2021 07:36:11 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Paul Eggert's message of "Wed, 7 Jul 2021 14:58:17 -0700") Message-ID: <871r891i5w.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=fweimer@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=fweimer@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -41 X-Spam_score: -4.2 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.439, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: bug-gnulib@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Gnulib discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: bug-gnulib@gnu.org, Bruno Haible Errors-To: bug-gnulib-bounces+normalperson=yhbt.net@gnu.org Sender: "bug-gnulib" * Paul Eggert: > On 7/7/21 1:45 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> Y2038 support requires recompilation. If you are able to do that, why >> not recompile for a 64-bit architecture? > > Doesn't this argue against _TIME_BITS=64 in general? It seems to be > saying that one should just recompile for 64-bit, and never use > _TIME_BITS=64. I think it does, but apparently 32-bit Arm is an outlier, related to DRAM sizes. I'm still not convinced that glibc needs to support that, but the community wasn't opposed to it. >> This probably needs per-package/component work to enable dual ABI, >> similar to what glibc did for its time_t interfaces.... >> I don't expect many upstreams to support this effort. > > Agreed. >> Two separate i386 ports seem to require the least human >> resources to maintain. > > That's a reasonable approach and if people want to do that they can, > even with the latest Gnulib and the next version of Glibc. > > However, people who want to run old binaries will surely stick to the > 32-bit-time_t i386 port, which means they won't use the 64-bit-time_t > i386 port. So it's not clear to me that they will cotton to this approach. Sorry, I don't understand. Which approach? I expect the legacy i386 port to be the main one. Thanks, Florian