[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: 64-bit time_t transition for 32-bit archs: a proposal



On 2023-05-17 20:14 -0500, Richard Laager wrote:
> 
> They mention, "We likely have to complete Modern C porting first to remove
> any instances of -Wimplicit-function-declaration otherwise the redirects in
> glibc for e.g. time->time64 won't actually work."

> Has that issue been considered here? (I can't speak intelligently on it at
> this time. I just want to make sure it's on your radar.)

I was aware of it (the gentoo info is linked on the 64bit-time wiki
page), but had not yet looked into how significant an issue this actually
was, so had not documented it. (frankly, I was hoping we could avoid
tying yet another transition into this one). Thanks for the reminder.

So having re-read that, if I understand this correctly, we do need to
be mindful that software which looks up functions or function
parameters in unusual ways (e.g. cross-language Foreign Function
Interfaces, or using implicit declarations) is likely to get the
wrong-size definition (because glibc makes both versions available).

So we should enable -Wimplicit-function-declaration on libraries being
rebuilt because their ABIs changed. We don't need to enable/fix it for
everything though. A rebuild check of affected libraries to see how
much work this adds would be a good idea.

I'll add this info the the wiki and do some tests.

Wookey
-- 
Principal hats:  Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: