apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: [Vote] Release APR 1.2.9/0.9.14 and apr-iconv 1.2.0
Date Wed, 06 Jun 2007 05:59:49 GMT
Davi Arnaut wrote:
> Bojan Smojver wrote:
>> On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 09:38 +1000, Bojan Smojver wrote:
>>> testlfs             :  Line 265: Large Files not supported
>> Or is this just a misleading message saying "these things are enabled by
>> default on this platform"?
> Good question. LFS doesn't exist for 64 bit platforms, but because it
> supports large files out of the box. This leads to another question,
> should APR_HAS_LARGE_FILES be defined on 64-bit systems? It seems
> reasonably safe to do so.

I've always understood HAS_LARGE_FILES to mean that offsets don't fit
into a size_t alignment, they are larger offsets than are otherwise
represented in memory.  The thought that apr_off_t > off_t might also
fit that bill.

But no, we should probably figure out how to report this case more
intellegently in testlfs so people don't panic.  LARGE_FILES, imho,
should not be set where special handling of the file offsets didn't

View raw message