Carl Fredrik Hammar, le Mon 18 May 2009 15:07:49 +0200, a écrit : > Hi, > > On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 09:57:26PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Carl Fredrik Hammar, le Sun 17 May 2009 21:48:01 +0200, a écrit : > > > On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 09:23:38PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > > > Carl Fredrik Hammar, le Sun 17 May 2009 21:18:57 +0200, a écrit : > > > > > In that case we could just remove the PATH_MAX. > > > > > > > > That'd prevent from actually providing USB someday. > > > > > > Yes, but I think we should wait with a real solution until we actually > > > have USB support and can test it. In the mean time I think its best > > > to have a non-solution that breaks loudly as soon we do have USB. > > > > I don't understand your reasoning. What do you precisely mean by > > 'remove the PATH_MAX'? Since you were talking about applications not > > even using the result I assumed you meant something like > > > > char filename[1]; > > This is precisely what I meant. > > > but then once compiled this way, these applications won't work even if > > after that we provide a libusb that works. > > A similar problem happens when defining LIBUSB_PATH_MAX, but apps will > only break when paths longer than it are encountered. Until that happens > it, this limitation might go unnoticed.
Yes. And that might never happen so we'd not have to recompile them. > Using malloced memory is the ideal solution, but potentially a lot of > work. And as I said, it may break. > When we actually have USB support, we will have more motivation > to implement it and the ability to actually test to see if it works. > Of course, the apps will need to be recompiled once it's in place. Not necessarily. If we define LIBUSB_PATH_MAX, we can just keep them the way they're already compiled. > Would this be a big problem? We can name the libusb another way to express the different ABI and not miss any applications that isn't recompiled with the new ABI. > If that's the case, then your suggestion of using char *filenname instead > would be supperior. Since only apps using sizeof(filename) will need > to be fixed and recompiled. But how to detect them? Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
