From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAB2C7CA0 for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 21:05:05 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73AE6304032 for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 19:05:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail05.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail05.adl6.internode.on.net [150.101.137.143]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 1AD0jMuuTG0G7HYo for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 19:04:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 12:04:14 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Remove off64_t from linux.h Message-ID: <20160620020414.GH26977@dastard> References: <20160618145238.GA17768@nyan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160618145238.GA17768@nyan> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Felix Janda Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 04:52:38PM +0200, Felix Janda wrote: > The off64_t type is usually only conditionally exposed under the > feature test macro _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE (also defined by _GNU_SOURCE). > To make the public xfs headers more standalone therefore off64_t should > be avoided. "more standalone"? What does that mean? And what does it mean for all the xfsprogs code that still uses off64_t? i.e. if you are going to make xfsprogs fail to compile on configs that don't define off64_t, then it makes no sense to leave all the users of off64_t in the xfsprogs code.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs