[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up
From: |
Miroslav Lichvar |
Subject: |
Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up |
Date: |
Wed, 18 Jan 2023 16:52:36 +0100 |
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 12:29:34PM -0800, Gary E. Miller wrote:
> > Ok, maybe gpsd is not impacted by the libraries it is using, but it
> > seems libgps is using some time_t fields, so they would need to be
> > replaced by int64_t or something to avoid breaking libgps applications
> > that don't use the same time_t.
>
> I'll look at that. Anything in particular?
"git grep -E '(timespec|timeval|time_t)' include/gps.h" shows:
timespec_t time; // Time of update
timespec_t then; // time of log entry, zero if invalid
timespec_t utctime;
time_t tow; // GNSS Epoch Time in ms
timespec_t mtime; // time of measurement
timespec_t mtime; /* time of measurement: sec, nsec
timespec_t activated;
timespec_t cycle, mincycle; // refresh cycle time in seconds
timespec_t real;
timespec_t clock;
timespec_t online; /* NZ if GPS is on line, 0 if not.
timespec_t skyview_time; // skyview time
timespec_t time;
timespec_t qErr_time;
extern time_t mkgmtime(struct tm *);
extern timespec_t iso8601_to_timespec(const char *);
extern char *timespec_to_iso8601(timespec_t t, char[], size_t len);
> Are you going to patch chronyd with your variable length sock idea?
> Current gpsd git head is a good test case for that.
It's now in chrony git. Let me know if it doesn't work for you.
--
Miroslav Lichvar
Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up, Hal Murray, 2023/01/14
Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up, Miroslav Lichvar, 2023/01/16