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-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [IPv6:2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37CFF1F9FD for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 13:05:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 179BD3950408; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 13:05:51 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 179BD3950408 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1615208751; bh=A/N2Iy6DglNC93LT6Y8Re2YvglsqRnszSHiJjlKIlbU=; h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=HlPDKoVIMjhNIRW2WfyKbJ3GofcMU7lsPvWpxXXKsW8cUvL7gAyit5L/HoTEgWjRf dMXZlVyB8ovqzVk9na0a5SKys6xsyEX4N0gI1/IBUGCdHbLGkyTGoEOmEQQAjYn0eG 1d5xEE4/0avYQvPc9v3X7282jaTdZxYvSVmezlFw= Received: from mail-qk1-x72e.google.com (mail-qk1-x72e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72e]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CED23950406 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 13:05:48 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 9CED23950406 Received: by mail-qk1-x72e.google.com with SMTP id n79so9069913qke.3 for ; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 05:05:48 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=A/N2Iy6DglNC93LT6Y8Re2YvglsqRnszSHiJjlKIlbU=; b=agdO5n2ZzkMznKG8IggDI42/K9ottFZ7EcV31EGoCbT//Qnf2N0w6KKLTqJtmqiut7 FwG77Z3q345uR7DG67WVuvI/2SihHekW4ppMaSv1ixlUQRvD26dTeM2KotLZeWfHQtdE Jd97ifX/CO92agiIFqlw5hDRybVL/c06jZvlVJe5y2pl69SpQItr2o6WV1gIOC2gahJi +oIfZshJoyGUWAIVL3bKigEv1c1IcyVhdNwkM9RJsAtSVZyVHlEoFu02hXjgbfDZvsfK SkgEe6lKHmLNl/AKwWTUHdbCUuQ8q0wo6CtH83FmEtuLUlVeT1LCf8bfi3TAqmRPB1v1 YZoA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530zT2nlCreX13hMm2AlNfzbNXcm83LmalLeC4047Sn2LtwPZmws cuow4IxCKzFMPXK4eptwSB8n6c8GCyyj1Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyG7QMrs2d9A3Lc7z8uuIBJJq8YNEuAvz2kf27KqtE0f3WcTL4Swh5iihtbI4+0/YOOQuRYZQ== X-Received: by 2002:a37:a404:: with SMTP id n4mr19852593qke.439.1615208747897; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 05:05:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.4] ([177.194.48.209]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id l65sm7549312qkf.113.2021.03.08.05.05.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 08 Mar 2021 05:05:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 22/52] login: Use 64-bit time on struct lastlog [BZ #25844] To: Joseph Myers References: <20210305201518.798584-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <20210305201518.798584-23-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 10:05:45 -0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha Reply-To: Adhemerval Zanella Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" On 05/03/2021 21:07, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Fri, 5 Mar 2021, Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha wrote: > >> The new struct has the same size on both 32-bit and 64-bit >> architectures. As for utmp{x} 64-bit time_t support, a new file name >> is defined for _PATH_LASTLOG. > > I'd expect a NEWS entry, whether in this patch or another one, that goes > into detail about how the different formats are handled for all affected > files using the utmp and lastlog formats (so giving sufficient information > for a distributor to implement upgrade support that avoids corrupting the > files or losing any existing data in them, for example, and for anyone who > wishes to write applications that access old files in the old formats). > Fair enough, I will update the patch with a proper NEWS entry.