[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: stat vs stat64 - ugly problem

On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 01:20:45AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously David N. Welton wrote:
> > Right, so how do we fix this?  It is our problem, in that we need to
> > make the software we distribute work together.  But are you also
> > saying that upstream shouldn't be setting that bit in their header
> > file?
> As long as the API (and ABI) never exports things like struct stat and
> offset_t (ie things that are affected by enabling LFS) it should not
> matter if you link things that are compiled with LFS with things that
> are not.
> However that define should never be in a header file, especially
> not one that other applications can use. Doing that should warrant
> a hefty bugreport.

And if they do require the LFS for their interface, then I'd go with:

#error _FILE_OFFSET_BITS must be defined for foo

Which leaves the app to explicitely enabling it, either at the top of
the .c files, or with CFLAGS.

Adam Olsen, aka Rhamphoryncus

Reply to: