It seems like a bug. _FILE_OFFSET_BITS is defined in the source files
(making off_t 64 bit) but not in the headers. Not sure how this stuff
ever worked, but I guess just making it 64 bit at all times makes sense.
-SL
On 10/17/2016 04:21 PM, Elias Pschernig wrote:
4GB is not very large in general - I could easily see a game's data pack
be larger than that. Also videos are often more than 4GB. But chances
are when compiling for 32-bit there could be some other limit so you
would not be able to work with such sizes anyway - however I just don't
understand why the Allegro API does have to expose that with a weird
type like off_t which changes size depending on the platform. Maybe I'll
do a sed -i -e 's/off_t/int64_t/g' and create a pull request if nobody
disagrees - but I don't know the original reason for off_t so maybe
there is a good reason for it.
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Edgar Reynaldo
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Meant to send this to the mailing list. Sorry bout that.
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: [AD] Allegro 5.2.1.1 + latest MinGW = off_t undefined
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 17:32:25 -0500
From: Edgar Reynaldo <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
To: Elias Pschernig <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>
On 10/9/2016 10:01 AM, Elias Pschernig wrote:
Or maybe replace off_t with int64_t - the uses I can see seem very
suspicious, and most likely currently Allegro 5 will break if it
is ever compiled on a system where off_t is only 32 bit.
On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 9:59 PM, SiegeLord <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Sounds like the proper solution is to define _POSIX_C_SOURCE
then, perhaps guarded by a check for ALLEGRO_GCC.
All of these errors have been fixed by patches issued by Keith
Marshall of MinGW, as detailed here :
https://www.allegro.cc/forums/thread/616526/1025585#target
<https://www.allegro.cc/forums/thread/616526/1025585#target>
So as far as I can see, Allegro 5 programs now properly compile with
the C++11 standard in use.
Do we really need to replace off_t with int64_t though? I mean
better safe than sorry, but are we really ever going to deal with
file system entries larger than 4GB? Where does the issue with using
off_t on 64 bit systems come in? If we needed file system offsets I
would agree that int64_t would be better, but I don't see any of
that in use at the moment.
Edgar
_______________________________________________
Allegro-developers mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/allegro-developers
<https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/allegro-developers>
_______________________________________________
Allegro-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/allegro-developers
_______________________________________________
Allegro-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/allegro-developers
