Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] archive-tar: huge offset and future timestamps would not work on 32-bit

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 01:43:57PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >>> As we are not yet moving everything to size_t but still using ulong >>> internally when talking about the size of object, platforms with >>> 32-b

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] archive-tar: huge offset and future timestamps would not work on 32-bit

Jeff King writes: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 01:43:57PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> As we are not yet moving everything to size_t but still using ulong >> internally when talking about the size of object, platforms with >> 32-bit long will not be able to produce tar archive with 4GB+ file, >

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] archive-tar: huge offset and future timestamps would not work on 32-bit

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 01:43:57PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > As we are not yet moving everything to size_t but still using ulong > internally when talking about the size of object, platforms with > 32-bit long will not be able to produce tar archive with 4GB+ file, > and cannot grok 0

[PATCH v2 2/2] archive-tar: huge offset and future timestamps would not work on 32-bit

As we are not yet moving everything to size_t but still using ulong internally when talking about the size of object, platforms with 32-bit long will not be able to produce tar archive with 4GB+ file, and cannot grok 0777UL as a constant. Disable the extended header feature and do not test