This is the mail archive of the libc-ports@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the libc-ports project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFC] Copy as much as you can during a 32-bit stat before returning EOVERFLOW?


On 02/26/2013 04:00 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
> The argument in favor of this API change seems quite thin.  An old
> program will have to be modified to accept EOVERFLOW failures, so why
> not modify it to use *64 interfaces or -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 instead?
> It may seem at first blush that the change would be simpler in complex
> programs.  But, in fact, to be robust when using older libcs a program
> would have to do something very special to distinguish a library call
> (new-style) that delivered some truncated values from one (old-style)
> that delivered some or all uninitialized fields.

A given users needs are far more focused. In practice they want to move
to a newer distribution or filesystem and keep down the cost of the 
upgrade while incrementally fixing applications.

> I don't see any defensible rationale for putting such a change into
> libc.

I agree. I didn't want to colour the conversation with my initial opinion,
but it seems like everyone is pretty well agreed that the change would
complicate the API without enough gain.

Cheers,
Carlos.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]