On 02/17/11 04:36 PM, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 11:28:19PM +0300, Van de Bugger wrote: >> Thus, I want my keyboard stuff to be located in a place of my choice. >> Probably, I like very-very-very-long directory and file names, and my >> names are not in Latin alphabet, so 1024 bytes may actually mean just >> 512 characters or even lesser. >> >> Thus, please stop thinking the people not like you are idiots and let us >> fix the idiot limit. > > This is probably the most unproductive mail I've seen in ... well, OK, > it's just very unproductive. > > Stick to the technical issues -- if you have a solid patch to send it > that will actually allow you to open paths longer than PATH_MAX on an > actual real system -- and leave the name-calling out completely.
Sorry, my fault for suggesting that people who wanted long paths were being idiots, though I still think it's a limit that will be hit so few times that it's not worth a lot of effort worrying about. Certainly in more general purpose code, allocating dynamically sized buffers makes sense, but setxkbmap is very limited in the paths it needs to deal with. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@oracle.com Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System _______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel