On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 23:52 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 08/06/10 23:41, Iain R. Learmonth wrote: > > On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 23:37 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > >> Not really. The point is that there's no such limits on Hurd (e.g. max > >> hostname > >> length, max pathname length...). > > > > The limits may not physically exist, but for applications looking for > > them, wouldn't it be good to have that compatibility built in? > > No, it's better to fix the applications since they are not guaranteed to exist > (POSIX doesn't mandate them). Furthermore, what would you put in them? :-) >
I was thinking along the lines of FreeBSD's Linux compatibility, allowing applications to run with little modification. I understand that to hang on to things that aren't in the specification, or are deprecated, is not really a good thing, but if adding a library of headers that defines these limits is easier than modifying a load of applications that depend on them, this could be a good idea. Regards, Iain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
