64-bit time_t?

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 05:26:04AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
>Is the transition to 1.7 a good time to change the ABI and offer a 64-bit
>time_t type that won't overflow in 2038?  Would we have to do the same
>sort of transition magic as was done back in 1.5 for 32-bit vs. 64-bit off_t?

Argh.  I was *just* thinking about this yesterday.

I think the answer is yes.  We can probably do some header file magic to
allow backwards contemptibility, too.

I hate making a last minute change like this now but it really is the best
time to get this done I think.  I'll take a look at how hard it would be to
do this over the weekend.

Thanks for bringing this up, Eric.

cgf

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple