On Wednesday 16 August 2006 14:48, Eric Anderson wrote:
On 08/16/06 13:45, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
At 11:31 AM -0500 8/16/06, Eric Anderson wrote:
My point was, that either path you take (if BSD_VISIBLE is
defined or not), you end up with d_name having a size of
255 + 1, so what's the
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Micah [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: #define MAXNAMLEN 255
: chard_name[MAXNAMLEN + 1]; /* name must be no longer than
: this */
: #if !__BSD_VISIBLE
: #undef MAXNAMLEN
: #endif
: };
: I'm not sure if it's more readable, but it puts 255 in only
M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Micah [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: #define MAXNAMLEN 255
: chard_name[MAXNAMLEN + 1]; /* name must be no longer than
: this */
: #if !__BSD_VISIBLE
: #undef MAXNAMLEN
: #endif
: };
: I'm not sure if it's more
On Wed, 2006-Aug-16 15:54:25 -0700, Micah wrote:
I think you could fake it as follows:
struct dirent {
__uint32_t d_fileno;/* file number of entry */
__uint16_t d_reclen;/* length of this record */
__uint8_t d_type; /* file type, see
On 08/16/06 00:49, Tobias Roth wrote:
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 10:26:13PM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote:
Does the ifdef in the struct dirent (pasted in below) make any sense?
Seems like regardless of whether the __BSD_VISIBLE is defined or not,
the d_name length will always be 255 + 1.
Eric
At 11:31 AM -0500 8/16/06, Eric Anderson wrote:
My point was, that either path you take (if BSD_VISIBLE is
defined or not), you end up with d_name having a size of
255 + 1, so what's the point the having it at all?
To make it clear that d_name is tied to the exact value
of MAXNAMLEN (just in
On 08/16/06 13:45, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
At 11:31 AM -0500 8/16/06, Eric Anderson wrote:
My point was, that either path you take (if BSD_VISIBLE is
defined or not), you end up with d_name having a size of
255 + 1, so what's the point the having it at all?
To make it clear that d_name is
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 02:45:05PM -0400, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
At 11:31 AM -0500 8/16/06, Eric Anderson wrote:
My point was, that either path you take (if BSD_VISIBLE is
defined or not), you end up with d_name having a size of
255 + 1, so what's the point the having it at all?
To make
Eric Anderson wrote:
On 08/16/06 00:49, Tobias Roth wrote:
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 10:26:13PM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote:
Does the ifdef in the struct dirent (pasted in below) make any sense?
Seems like regardless of whether the __BSD_VISIBLE is defined or not,
the d_name length will
Tony Maher wrote:
Eric Anderson wrote:
On 08/16/06 00:49, Tobias Roth wrote:
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 10:26:13PM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote:
Does the ifdef in the struct dirent (pasted in below) make any sense?
Seems like regardless of whether the __BSD_VISIBLE is defined or not,
the d_name
Does the ifdef in the struct dirent (pasted in below) make any sense?
Seems like regardless of whether the __BSD_VISIBLE is defined or not,
the d_name length will always be 255 + 1.
Eric
struct dirent {
__uint32_t d_fileno;/* file number of entry */
__uint16_t
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 10:26:13PM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote:
Does the ifdef in the struct dirent (pasted in below) make any sense?
Seems like regardless of whether the __BSD_VISIBLE is defined or not,
the d_name length will always be 255 + 1.
Eric
struct dirent {
__uint32_t
12 matches
Mail list logo