Pádraig Brady <[email protected]> writes: > This static value might be too much or too little. > Hmm I see the inotify man page states the above is sufficient. > I was thinking of caching fpathconf(dirfd, _PC_NAME_MAX) if available, > but I suppose one could have other file systems (bind) mounted > in the parent dir, in which case the current FS limit wouldn't be appropriate. > > Also I was worried about the portability of NAME_MAX > (which is not available on Solaris for example). > However NAME_MAX should be available where inotify is (Linux/FreeBSD). > > I'd add a short comment about that though. Something like. > > /* NAME_MAX covers that max length of all file systems > that might be mounted in the parent dir, and the define > should be available any where that inotify is. */
Yep, I considered fpathconf as well, but my thinking was that outside of reading the code itself, the man pages would be the most authoritative > The explicit cleanup_ call above is redundant, > and will result in it being called twice upon skip. Thanks for the review. I pushed it with that change and the others you suggested [1]. Collin [1] https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/commit/83545af2a876fc9653dcd984e5f8eeef05711661
