This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Should _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE imply _LARGEFILE_SOURCE?
- To: hjl at valinux dot com
- Subject: Re: Should _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE imply _LARGEFILE_SOURCE?
- From: Paul Eggert <eggert at twinsun dot com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 15:48:53 -0800 (PST)
- CC: libc-alpha at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- References: <20001213130132.B4887@valinux.com>
> Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 13:01:32 -0800
> From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@valinux.com>
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
>
> Should _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE imply _LARGEFILE_SOURCE? Solaris 2.7 does
> as well as HP
The original large_file spec
<http://ftp.sas.com/standards/large.file/x_open.20Mar96.html>
says in section 3.3.2 that _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE should make
ftello and fseeko visible, just as _LARGEFILE_SOURCE does.
This is not quite the same as saying that _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE should
imply _LARGEFILE_SOURCE, but having the implication is one way to
satisfy that spec.
(Not that anyone should ever actually _use_ _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE. :-)