From: "Ramsay Jones" <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
To: "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: "Gerrit Pape" <pape@smarden.org>, <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Build on Debian GNU/Hurd
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 18:22:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <000001c6de6b$a9994920$c47eedc1@ramsay1.demon.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609211050390.4388@g5.osdl.org>
On Thurs Sept 21 at 18:54, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> >
> > IMHO, setting the value in the Makefile, for systems that don't define
> > PATH_MAX, is a much better solution. In fact, that is what I thought was
> > already being done.
>
> Well, considering that we _can_ test defines, why not just do it
> automatically.
>
> In other words, instead of this patch:
>
> > > -
> > > -#ifndef PATH_MAX
> > > -# define PATH_MAX 4096
> > > -#endif
> > > +#include <limits.h>
>
> Just make the code read
>
> #include <limits.h>
>
> /*
> * Insane systems don't have a fixed PATH_MAX, it's POSIX
> * compliant but not worth worrying about, so if we didn't
> * get PATH_MAX from <limits.h>, just make up our own
> */
> #ifndef PATH_MAX
> # define PATH_MAX 4096
> #endif
>
> and after that we can just ignore the issue forever more.
Yes, that would certainly be a solution. (Of course, setting the value in
the Makefile would still be a better solution ;-)
However, ...
>
> The thing is, it's not like we even really _care_ what PATH_MAX is all
> that deeply. We just want to get some random value that is reasonable.
>
> Linus
>
... given the above, a better solution is: don't use PATH_MAX.
Simply #define a new symbol in a suitable git header file and globally
replace uses of PATH_MAX with the new symbol. Job done.
All the best,
Ramsay
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-22 17:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-15 12:58 [PATCH] Build on Debian GNU/Hurd Gerrit Pape
2006-09-15 15:47 ` Martin Waitz
2006-09-16 5:35 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-09-19 17:03 ` Gerrit Pape
2006-09-21 17:37 ` Ramsay Jones
2006-09-21 17:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-22 17:22 ` Ramsay Jones [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='000001c6de6b$a9994920$c47eedc1@ramsay1.demon.co.uk' \
--to=ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pape@smarden.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).