Bruno Haible wrote:
>> Bruno's comment (in the text you elided) suggests intent to have
>> pathmax.h leave PATH_MAX undefined on the Hurd:
>>
>> >> I find it reasonable to use "#ifdef PATH_MAX" in front of every use of
>> >> PATH_MAX, like POSIX requires.
>>
>> With such a change, each of the a
Hi Jim,
> Bruno's comment (in the text you elided) suggests intent to have
> pathmax.h leave PATH_MAX undefined on the Hurd:
>
> >> I find it reasonable to use "#ifdef PATH_MAX" in front of every use of
> >> PATH_MAX, like POSIX requires.
>
> With such a change, each of the above uses would
Eric Blake wrote:
> [adding coreutils]
>
> On 06/20/2011 10:51 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
2011-06-20 Bruno Haible
pathmax: Never define PATH_MAX to a non-constant expression.
* lib/pathmax.h (PATH_MAX): Don't define in terms of pathconf.
* m4/pathmax.m4 (gl_PATHMA
On 06/21/2011 03:50 AM, James Youngman wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
>> I find it reasonable to use "#ifdef PATH_MAX" in front of every use of
>> PATH_MAX, like POSIX requires.
>
> I agree.
>
> I think it would be helpful if there were some automated way of
> rem
[adding coreutils]
On 06/20/2011 10:51 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>>> 2011-06-20 Bruno Haible
>>>
>>> pathmax: Never define PATH_MAX to a non-constant expression.
>>> * lib/pathmax.h (PATH_MAX): Don't define in terms of pathconf.
>>> * m4/pathmax.m4 (gl_PATHMAX): Don't test for pathcon
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> I find it reasonable to use "#ifdef PATH_MAX" in front of every use of
> PATH_MAX, like POSIX requires.
I agree.
I think it would be helpful if there were some automated way of
reminding people to do that though. Many people develop on sys
Eric Blake wrote:
> On 06/20/2011 04:34 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
>> I find it reasonable to use "#ifdef PATH_MAX" in front of every use of
>> PATH_MAX, like POSIX requires.
>>
>>> But later on in test-getcwd, we have code
>>> that does #ifndef PATH_MAX, which is no longer reachable because of our
>
On 06/20/2011 04:34 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> I find it reasonable to use "#ifdef PATH_MAX" in front of every use of
> PATH_MAX, like POSIX requires.
>
>> But later on in test-getcwd, we have code
>> that does #ifndef PATH_MAX, which is no longer reachable because of our
>> guarantee that PATH_MA
Eric Blake wrote:
> Actually, I agree with the first:
>
> > 2011-06-18 Bruno Haible
> >
> > pathmax: Ensure correct value for PATH_MAX on HP-UX.
> > * lib/pathmax.h (PATH_MAX) [HP-UX]: Define to 1024.
OK, I've committed it now.
> But dislike the second:
>
> > 2011-06-18 Bruno Haibl
