On 24/09/2014 3:51 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 24/09/14 07:45, Chris Johns wrote:
On 24/09/2014 3:42 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 24/09/14 07:34, Chris Johns wrote:
On 24/09/2014 3:27 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Yes, we should move to 64-bit time_t after the next release or even
now.
What is involved ?
Something like this:
diff --git a/newlib/libc/include/machine/types.h
b/newlib/libc/include/machine/types.h
index 40a75fa..b7265b9 100644
--- a/newlib/libc/include/machine/types.h
+++ b/newlib/libc/include/machine/types.h
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
#endif
#define _CLOCK_T_ unsigned long /* clock() */
-#define _TIME_T_ long /* time() */
+#define _TIME_T_ long long /* time() */
#define _CLOCKID_T_ unsigned long
#define _TIMER_T_ unsigned long
This is common to all newlib users. Did you mean to do that ?
Yes, we all use roughly the same time. Maybe we should propose this
right after the next Newlib release.
I suspect this would be rejected in favour of keeping 32bit support and
providing optional 64bit support. Small memory targets would have
storage issues.
Chris
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
