On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 12:12:06AM +0200, B. Johannessen wrote: > Chris Lightfoot wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 12:02:36AM +0200, B. Johannessen wrote: > >> I'll buy a beer for the first person to find me an authoritative > >> reference on the signedness of off_t :-) > > > > the second argument to lseek(2) is of type off_t and it > > therefore must be signed, since you may seek backwards > > using that syscall. > > Amazing how fast you can get an answer when there's free beer involved :-) > > While the above is hardly a *reference*, it's clearly definitive proof > that off_t is signed. Chris, I owe you a beer! Either send me your > address and I'll mail it, or let me know the next time you're in > south-western Norway :-)
much as the idea of receiving a beer in the mail appeals, I'll let you off this time ;-) -- Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig. -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
