Re: Having fun with the following C code (UB)
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 01:06:02PM +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
>> > Here is a little bug I just discovered:
>> > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22664658/finding-off-t-size
>> > For reference, here are the packages affected in debian:
>> > http://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=LARGE_OFF_T
>> While this affects all autoconf based package in debian (limited to
>> 32bits arch), I preferred not to mass bug everyone out there and
>> LFS is still a release goal, not a requirement.
> Can you please describe the consequences of this bug for affected
Sorry I thought this was obvious.
Short summary you will not get LFS on 32bits arch.
Long summary: autoconf and others projects relied on the small C code
I posted to determine whether or not the target system need the
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 to have a 64bits off_t. Most people are using
x86_64 and thus will not see any difference. The only affect people
are those looking for LFS support on 32bits system, where (by default)
off_t is only 32bits (this is the famous fseek vs fseeko issue).
Hoping to be clear this time,