Bill Studenmund wrote:

> [ big inodes vs. 64 bit times ]
> 
> That depends on how we support times beyond 2^31-1 seconds. Large indoes
> would be one way. But large inodes would break bootloaders which
> understand ffs. So we have to come up with a backwards-compatabile way.
> And if we have it, it's not obvious that we have to go to large inodes.
> 
> The best one I've heard of so far is to take the 64-bits we have for time
> (32 bits for seconds, 32 bits for nanoseconds) and shuffle them around.

ISTR that this was already decided to be the "plan", but can't find a
reference off hand...

Simon.
--
Simon Burge                            <simonb@wasabisystems.com>
NetBSD Sales, Support and Service:  http://www.wasabisystems.com/