From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de (mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de [85.215.255.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D47703222 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2023 20:31:10 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1677875105; cv=none; d=strato.com; s=strato-dkim-0002; b=r0VF9evrp7cH4TBwsVBt385wlVdbpo8gl9pz4mbYdEZp9/xGEVGNkKvvw3sDKCv3sg x2SSJFR2PSD1u+vM3x+T7gHFNTKiXbQD1wSWg9XEFU0Jd/irYMWG5/heMTwywNNz0tPc pH+ilGHGmjkc64KFL7DJAz7tQ1UBqhrtKtB30+ctgcZYSHTu3//cJgruzTBsbG9WdrP+ ugAbCaWTUhwASvwI0FfdiATNkvCirElaAT9GNlL8BbBC6ptDivTj5hW5dvDGSfrXZL+R SFoEqx6/xtdEGfnKzo0epitVZwf2owr4HRDESbT9bXBE7ZzRhDMiAIs6cEQsErFAvsh3 bDtA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1677875105; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=strato.com; h=References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:Cc:Date: From:Subject:Sender; bh=TAx6DWJy3zeIDZFfAqTKOx+jvgV/WNkO1opj7Wsp9u0=; b=p847AUMbt7J44b6DmPr/7lE/Ta53ykdTl8dQvVShh2E/as5ELIwCN1/xkhYfCIpp4Z IRWfDClJhdkB+SY0X5IK+NGbjnf9fRpjNzpI4/Tq3W+jMbjRhJANk9W+x/gME6XNT/LI xsEHu1NeXzeJxBxpY+Q4hyLwzxvv3FqN4farSluQkamWiqJYF+eUuVfAKbRng3Ju/DMd X6yTSSpk7kXQe60ZIO2LxYyl311I/+k4VDfHnktn5AM5Ssquen+Yhs5TdfWPuns85vFX Xwl5biNKnWzhBnkZhALmdf+ksfLz8MLzDMm3l7+zpmXI9NwB5RRpeT4+Z0kbUQnpk0aR OU8A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; strato.com; arc=none; dkim=none X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1677875105; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=clisp.org; h=References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:Cc:Date: From:Subject:Sender; bh=TAx6DWJy3zeIDZFfAqTKOx+jvgV/WNkO1opj7Wsp9u0=; b=XoqoGmWakNL4msiUA4StCsA/+xC0/YMFHMlLXpwiQ91p2zBqVu0gOgzII0ChNFMUNw 1QPgZA0VI3Z1I4aZyY+ow+UgwSROTAWZja6lu6/EEm0O1VmJ1Or88+vZfZxR+kaklN52 mxth7YsaOzCfBWNWKkBuHC3irAdPovlAVICngDDFeDANMOi3mdt1mVjdpyYPe5+yOmz2 NtaEYj05oTJfaE6A6zPZL3aoeSxX92IL5FBlk6NhdsKD8AT5VGWjykYEiQDaMzHVj59x nmOSEC7NcJLqUdImy05Vggs5MJyS5XTHDANvFqJ5pi8DQz3wp3/7WIZpQ7Li6ObnLku9 DKBg== X-RZG-AUTH: ":Ln4Re0+Ic/6oZXR1YgKryK8brlshOcZlIWs+iCP5vnk6shH0WWb0LN8XZoH94zq68+3cfpPAjffPEe8kXgv4Zw4zff4g9E7hUg==" Received: from nimes.localnet by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 49.3.0 AUTH) with ESMTPSA id Yddb27z23KP5Qww (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate); Fri, 3 Mar 2023 21:25:05 +0100 (CET) From: Bruno Haible To: distributions@lists.linux.dev, Thorsten Kukuk Cc: Eric Blake Subject: Re: Y2038, glibc and utmp/utmpx on 64bit architectures Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2023 21:25:04 +0100 Message-ID: <2761646.h9gRbJKcGU@nimes> In-Reply-To: <20230303170729.GA4300@suse.com> References: <20230303104647.GA20891@suse.com> <3067bd0ec5134b039cdb8be9db8da8e5@DB6PR04MB3255.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> <20230303170729.GA4300@suse.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: distributions@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Thorsten Kukuk wrote: > > I really don=E2=80=99t think it is appropriate to outright remove POSIX= standard > > interfaces from Linux, replacing them with non-standard systemd APIs. >=20 > Nobody wants to remove the current utmp code (ok, not quite correct, > glibc developers plan to remove it from glibc, as it will stop working > in a few years) and feel free to convert all the code out there to use > the utmpx and not utmp interface. I don't understand: Do the glibc developers plan to remove the utmpx interface as well (together with utmp interface)? If no, then - Why does your blog post https://github.com/thkukuk/utmpx/blob/main/Y203= 8.md say "It looks like the glibc developers don't want to solve this problem but instead deprecate the utmp.h/utmpx.h/lastlog.h interface."? - What about the '#if __WORDSIZE_TIME64_COMPAT32' in /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/utmpx.h ? Isn't it as nasty as the '#if __WORDSIZE_TIME64_COMPAT32' in /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/utmp.h ? If yes, then - What is the point of your suggestion to "use the utmpx and not utmp interface", above? - Since there is no "FUTURE DIRECTIONS" in POSIX https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799.2018edition/functions/= endutxent.html will the utmpx interface get deprecated in POSIX, or stay as it is? Is the Austin Group already involved? Bruno