Definition of time_t changed from signed to unsigned...

[Clive D.W. Feather]

Guy Harris said:
>>> If you can, I'd change the time_t typedef in the OS.
>> Changing an OS-supplied definition is EXTREMELY DUMB. You're risking
>> breaking the OS interfaces.
> When he said "I am in the process of upgrading the kernel version on a 
> platform that I
> work on.", it sounded as if he might be one of the developers *of* that 
> platform

In which case it's a very different kettle of fish, I agree.

I read the original thread as suggesting just changing the header file
available to user code and reacted accordingly - that remains extremely
dumb. Changing the OS's own definitions is, of course, completely
different.

If I've reacted over nothing, I apologise to all concerned.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <clive at demon.net>   | Tel:    +44 20 8495 6138
Internet Expert     | Home:  <clive at davros.org>  | Fax:    +44 870 051 9937
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
Thus plc            |                            |