Philip Warner wrote: > > I just reread the patch; is it valid to assume fseek and fseeko have the > same failure modes? Or does the call to 'fseek' actually call fseeko?
The fseek was a typo. It should have been fseeko as you suggested. CVS updated. Your idea of using SEEK_SET is good, except I was concerned that the checkSeek call will move the file pointer. Is that OK? It doesn't seem appropriate. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
