> On 12 Nov 2022, at 21:31, Paul Eggert wrote:
>
> On 2022-11-12 12:23, Wookey wrote:
>> we can't just have everyone who enabled LFS sometime in the
>> last 20 years suddenly being forced into the time_t change (can we?)
>
> We've done it in the past.
>
> AC_SYS_LARGEFILE originally was in Gn
Wookey writes:
> Now, I'm not yet sure if just having autoconf 2.72 will actually break
> things. AIUI, these changes only apply where LFS
> (-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64) is turned on, so in Debian at least, where that
> is not the default on 32bit arches, maybe this is OK. But probably quite
> a lot
On 2022-11-12 12:23, Wookey wrote:
we can't just have everyone who enabled LFS sometime in the
last 20 years suddenly being forced into the time_t change (can we?)
We've done it in the past.
AC_SYS_LARGEFILE originally was in Gnulib, before it migrated to
Autoconf. Originally it affected only
On 2022-11-12 11:15 -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 2022-11-12 10:50, Bruno Haible wrote:
> > I'm saying
> > "tiny" because we are still 15 years away, and new releases of the (not
> > many) affected packages are likely to come in the next 1-2 years.
>
> Not so "tiny", I'm afraid. My department is
On 2022-11-12 10:50, Bruno Haible wrote:
I'm saying
"tiny" because we are still 15 years away, and new releases of the (not
many) affected packages are likely to come in the next 1-2 years.
Not so "tiny", I'm afraid. My department is still running a server with
libraries and executables that a
Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 2022-11-12 06:16, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > I am going to go ahead and do this if nobody raises a concrete objection
> > within the next 24 hours.
>
> I object to a simple reversion, as this will cause problems downstream
> with Gnulib-using applications, several of which h
On 2022-11-11 18:20, Zack Weinberg wrote:
I don’t think Paul considered the new behavior of AC_SYS_LARGEFILE to be
overriding the glibc maintainers. Rather, I think he was only thinking
about applications, not libraries, and only about source distribution.
No, I was thinking about libraries as
On 2022-11-12 06:16, Zack Weinberg wrote:
I am going to go ahead and do this if nobody raises a concrete objection
within the next 24 hours.
I object to a simple reversion, as this will cause problems downstream
with Gnulib-using applications, several of which have already been
released assum
Sam James writes:
>> On 12 Nov 2022, at 02:20, Zack Weinberg via Libc-alpha
>> wrote:
>> I am honestly not sure what to do about this in the long term, but for
>> the proposed “this weekend, just bugfixes” Autoconf 2.72, I do think it
>> makes sense to back out change #2, only — that is, AC_SYS
> On 12 Nov 2022, at 02:20, Zack Weinberg via Libc-alpha
> wrote:
>
> Sam James writes:
>>> On 11 Nov 2022, at 09:19, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> We need to support legacy binaries on i386. Few libraries are
>>> explicitly dual-ABI. Whether it's safe to switch libraries above glibc
>>> to LF
Sam James writes:
>> On 11 Nov 2022, at 09:19, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> We need to support legacy binaries on i386. Few libraries are
>> explicitly dual-ABI. Whether it's safe to switch libraries above glibc
>> to LFS or time64 needs to be evaluated on a per-library basis. For most
>> distribu
On 2022-11-11 03:38, Florian Weimer wrote:
But that said, these binaries are broken anyway in 2038?
No, I expect users to run them in time-shifted VMs or containers.
That's reasonable for systems where accurate timestamps are not
important and where time_t width mismatches would just get in t
* Sam James:
>> On 11 Nov 2022, at 09:19, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>
>> * Sam James:
>>
>>> In Gentoo, we've been planning out what we should do for time64 on
>>> glibc [0] and concluded that we need some support in glibc for a newer
>>> option. I'll outline why below.
>>>
>>> Proposal: glibc ga
> On 11 Nov 2022, at 09:19, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> * Sam James:
>
>> In Gentoo, we've been planning out what we should do for time64 on
>> glibc [0] and concluded that we need some support in glibc for a newer
>> option. I'll outline why below.
>>
>> Proposal: glibc gains two new build-tim
14 matches
Mail list logo
