Bug #843
Missing MAXNAMLEN?
| Status: | Closed | Start date: | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Low | Due date: | ||
| Assignee: | - | % Done: | 0% | |
| Category: | - | |||
| Target version: | - |
Description
FreeBSD, NetBSD, linux all define MAXNAMLEN in dirent.h, but not DFly.
Is this an oversight or deliberate?
History
#1
Updated by joerg almost 9 years ago
Deliberate. It doesn't make any sense and PATH_MAX or NAME_MAX should be
used instead. MAXNAMLEN is the historic limitation of FFS, for the
archive.
Joerg
#2
Updated by wa1ter almost 9 years ago
Yes, I see now. This is how linux works around it:
# ifdef NAME_MAX
# define MAXNAMLEN NAME_MAX
# else
# define MAXNAMLEN 255
# endif
# endif
#3
Updated by pavalos almost 5 years ago
- Description updated (diff)
- Status changed from New to Closed
- Assignee deleted (
0)