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: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) (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 A23291F461 for ; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 12:44:39 +0000 (UTC) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=s/NmF ixnTHH9DGqfV1Det05Y6qL7kmkhuYip4xFZivLbbPxhvXQHcuLhnSa77N1yW3q5f c3Q0BYPDU6+ez9RK3GcdiZY2mUIs7jxFPLhNTrjP3AXEYR9B6HYvvrQqVW709ktU GzEZL+jlV/wNvfuZ/RU1VTKMWvw7nFhVj6LnE0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=default; bh=sDGVsD3dz9T LlE7eu9Kzc6Yy8vQ=; b=j3UiJWgQaAvLtUnujhdOpahjddP2DhaHf5uv8aiZcqP 4sBSBlcz97oY0fjWsHnDZ7bu4BgZEC6hb4qDLQ2KKhteYuCRH8AsWRoGwvJEnoax C7MV9IdeZkzW8Q7HO9doH5aCJ5kfERX+Yw24eMlYb3nROdzj6Bd/8ml13RTQv+dE = Received: (qmail 8443 invoked by alias); 16 Jul 2019 12:44:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 8434 invoked by uid 89); 16 Jul 2019 12:44:37 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com From: Florian Weimer To: Wolfgang Denk Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, Lukasz Majewski Subject: Re: Accelerating Y2038 glibc fixes References: <20190712072103.D3DBC24003A@gemini.denx.de> Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 14:44:33 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20190712072103.D3DBC24003A@gemini.denx.de> (Wolfgang Denk's message of "Fri, 12 Jul 2019 09:21:03 +0200") Message-ID: <874l3mjgi6.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain * Wolfgang Denk: > We have been trying for some time to help some of our customers to > get patches into glibc to fix the remaining Y2038 issues. > Is there anything we can do to accelerate this process? As > mentioned, we are willing to dedicate both man-power and/or money, > if this helps. One difficult trade-off is that for you, this is just one-time enablement work, but the regular contributors will be stuck with the code you add forever. Especially since it touches 64-bit architectures as well. For me personally, the whole project is quite baffling. I'm interested in 32-bit changes only to support legacy binaries, and this is new work targeting new binaries. Particularly for i386, it *will* lead to ABI fragmentation. We can add dual ABI support for glibc, but for the rest of the system, distributions will have to pick a default (probably with their build flags selection), and they will make different choices. Some distributions will focus on backwards compatibility with legacy binaries, but others want to keep the i386 architecture alive for many more years. I really do not want to deal with the resulting confusion, but it seems that I do not have any choice there. Since I'm opposed to this entire project, I have largely refrained from reviews, except for things that looked obviously wrong to me (e.g., things that definitely break compatibility with older kernels or existing ABIs), but even for those cases, my feedback probably wasn't very helpful. Thanks, Florian