[BusyBox] Replace uptime with time [PATCH]
Manuel Novoa III
mjn3 at codepoet.org
Wed May 4 01:42:52 UTC 2005
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 07:47:10PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Tuesday 03 May 2005 06:45 pm, Larry Doolittle wrote:
> > Shaun -
> >
> > On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 03:02:20PM -0700, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> > > Replace uptime with time(NULL). time is more portable than uptime and
> > > eliminates the need to define uptime, reducing code size slightly.
> >
> > That doesn't sound good. Time on any computer is subject to
> > administrative warpage, in particular to get the system phased
> > with external reference(s). The uses listed are all internal
> > relative (elapsed) time, and would be needlessly confused (during
> > a time warp) if they used time() instead of uptime(). Unlike
> > time(), uptime is guaranteed monotonic.
> >
> > To address the portability argument, maybe uptime can fall back
> > to time(NULL) on systems that don't have a real uptime.
> >
> > - Larry
>
> Sigh. I should start giving these patches a little more time to settle, I
> think...
>
> Could you guys work out amongst yourselves whether nor not I should revert
> that and get back to me? (I don't personally care either way, and am trying
> to _avoid_ having to make this kind of judgement call. Erik's the
> maintainer, not me. I just liked this patch because it removed code...)
It needs to be reverted. Shaun can either provide a compat functions to
use when building with newlib (as I recall) or, better still, add uptime()
to newlib.
Manuel
More information about the busybox
mailing list