On 22 Feb 2001, Chris G. Demetriou wrote:

> eeh@netbsd.org writes:
> > I think we should apply the following changes
> > so our definitions of on-disk structures do not
> > depend on sizeof(time_t):
> 
> That's probably a reasonable thing to do.
> 
> However, at this point, the general decision about "time_t" on NetBSD
> is that it "should be" a 32-bit quantity, even on LP64 ports.  (Until
> that is, it's updated across the board to something else.) As far as I
> know, the sparc64 violates that...
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, you have two things to fix, and indeed, if
> you'd done the right thing with time_t months and months ago, wouldn't
> have had the on-disk structure problem now.

If you're referring to the large installed base of Sparc64 NetBSD machines-
uh, there really isn't one yet.