From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 38268 invoked by alias); 8 Sep 2017 17:08:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 38256 invoked by uid 89); 8 Sep 2017 17:08:40 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,URIBL_RED autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=letter X-HELO: smtp6-g21.free.fr Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2017 17:08:00 -0000 From: Albert ARIBAUD To: Joseph Myers Cc: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/52] Make GLIBC Y2038-proof Message-ID: <20170908190832.03476c79.albert.aribaud@3adev.fr> In-Reply-To: References: <20170907224219.12483-1-albert.aribaud@3adev.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-09/txt/msg00390.txt.bz2 Hi Joseph, On Thu, 7 Sep 2017 23:21:16 +0000, Joseph Myers wrote : > General observations on this patch series: > > * Nothing should use a GLIBC_Y2038 version. Use GLIBC_2.27 and update as > necessary during rebases if this doesn't get into 2.27. Understood, will do. > * Nothing should go in architecture-specific files such as > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/Versions. For OS-independent interfaces > use files such as time/Versions - wherever the existing versions of > those interfaces for existing time_t are. Will do. > * How such a patch series was tested needs to be described in the summary > of the series. For a series like this, full testsuite runs on multiple > 32-bit and 64-bit architectures as well as use of build-many-glibcs.py to > do the compilation tests for (almost) all configurations is important (or > if a series is a preliminary version with limited architecture support, > that should be stated explicitly, but the full testsuite should still pass > on at least one 32-bit and one 64-bit architecture). Will do. Right now, the patches are tested using an ad hoc system (as stated in the cover letter). I'll run the GLIBC test suite and add results to the cover letter in the next patcxh series iteration. > * I'd expect lots of extra tests using _TIME_BITS=64 to be added in such a > patch series, to make sure that every new ABI is covered by the testsuite. Indeed. > * Documentation of _TIME_BITS is clearly needed. Where should this documentation go? > * You need to make sure that new ABIs are not added / used on platforms > where time_t is already 64-bit. Will do. > * All new files need a descriptive first line before the copyright notice. Understood. > * All copyright ranges in new files should end with 2017. Will fix. > * No "Contributed by" in new files. Will fix. Thanks for your feedback! Cordialement, Albert ARIBAUD 3ADEV