Re: Proposed CHOST change for the 64bit time_t transition

2024-09-06 Thread Bruno Haible
Arsen Arsenović wrote: > An alternative that I pondered was to teach the linker about some notion > of "compatibility strings" that it would compare and reject if > different, plus teaching the compiler how to emit those, plus teaching > glibc to tell the compiler to emit those.. We could have key

Re: Proposed CHOST change for the 64bit time_t transition

2024-09-06 Thread Bruno Haible
Paul Eggert wrote: > I'd rather just switch, as Debian has. I'd go one step further, and not only make the ABI transition without changing the canonical triplet, but also make gcc and clang define -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_TIME_BITS=64 among their predefines. Rationale: * We want that a

Re: Proposed CHOST change for the 64bit time_t transition

2024-09-06 Thread Arsen Arsenović
Paul Eggert writes: > One possible improvement would be to append "t32" if you want 32-bit time_t, > instead of appending "t64" for 64-bit time_t. That way, people wouldn't be > stuck with appending that confusing "t64" for the foreseeable future, and only > specialists concerned with 32-bit time