From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A50D73858035 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 14:17:56 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org A50D73858035 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=owlfolio.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owlfolio.org Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 827565C0093; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 09:17:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 12 Nov 2022 09:17:56 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=owlfolio.org; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1668262676; x= 1668349076; bh=q+L8mwjPQ/Y2J2YR3Hc0xxaAwgOOhMmlAKjKrVo2Njw=; b=c 0ZZHfQ8pbyng7jsUkWmw5plXCo9Aj0otsAYJlHKp3qXLSNiplg8bZTuk4TaFUhls milxIUCrc20vwPIg8EWSdNDuRKF6dOXBud5FyoALpdZ22VKvsh2u+7kBz9/QhQwm H52CFOylQNfp6cVnHjVW/i7e//1fsd7yx0RxwcQjPXNTXu1bHEQFp8OptLtXbH/B reErCvZAVH+OvlIlAP5+LfAmgA8fvAsNrzNvg7X/QL5D11t5TCmPWGjA6DvzAjMB 3AKbbPaGvKadq+B0j8E+XbiqNfbEp1ykVYF+7RCekZK80QlauwQqPzCGZgpovYUV ooVnxx/GQ+usFbqmK+m5A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1668262676; x= 1668349076; bh=q+L8mwjPQ/Y2J2YR3Hc0xxaAwgOOhMmlAKjKrVo2Njw=; b=h 7Mngj79tOZl6iNax4dVsY/1dthobf4pCmfrw/RZGHTE/Qlk3WF5kulXeB+bZuckw ulAyzF3EWZ9UG6dIlbx8Zr4R/iHojRbxeY5LyUYAb9pPkW6E8if9NTlKwiro492P +lmhzxx4vogaZSOxSUp0mFJPsHYZttk5hR7QcFaC3tzDaUJVdswrFsZ08/p8hvnp XdEq+0o2GcUfJR2TPV3TEG5TbO91ADewJgbVYYxnWCaMToeWnbO0SL2futIkmbOs szKAO3JcvCfdupr5Ycyeu9GAU7pg34JjC42tc9W8ZsmaqwkrurVS3ClM1cpzI5NN jLZ2WKxu2PLjFEsWgr92A== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvgedrfeekgdeifecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvfevufhfffgjkfgfgggtgfesthhqredttderjeenucfhrhhomhepkggrtghk ucghvghinhgsvghrghcuoeiirggtkhesohiflhhfohhlihhordhorhhgqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpefhvdevuefgjeeuheegfeejhefhheegkeejhfejhffgveduhfehjefggfel fffgheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpe iirggtkhesohiflhhfohhlihhordhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i876146a2:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 09:17:55 -0500 (EST) From: Zack Weinberg To: Sam James Cc: Florian Weimer , Paul Eggert , Carlos O'Donell via Libc-alpha , autoconf@gnu.org, c-std-porting@lists.linux.dev, toolchain@gentoo.org, bug-gnulib@gnu.org Subject: Re: On time64 and Large File Support References: <87wn81q254.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <26EF336D-C051-49D6-98A9-EF0707591A6D@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2022 09:16:37 -0500 In-Reply-To: <26EF336D-C051-49D6-98A9-EF0707591A6D@gentoo.org> (Sam James's message of "Sat, 12 Nov 2022 03:57:28 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: 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 =E2=80=9Cthis weekend, just bugfixes=E2=80=9D Autoconf 2.72= , I do think it >> makes sense to back out change #2, only =E2=80=94 that is, AC_SYS_YEAR20= 38 will >> exist, but AC_SYS_LARGEFILE will *not* imply AC_SYS_YEAR2038. That will >> limit the impact of AC_SYS_YEAR2038 to packages that have explicitly >> added it, and should make it safe for Fedora and Gentoo to drop in 2.72 >> in order to unblock C23 testing =E2=80=94 am I correct? It doesn=E2=80= =99t resolve the >> larger issue, but it gives us more time to think about what the >> resolution ought to be. >>=20 >> What do you think? > > This is really I think the best option while allowing us time & space > to complete the larger discussion. [=E2=80=A6] I am going to go ahead and do this if nobody raises a concrete objection within the next 24 hours. zw