For masochists: the leap o faith
Sat Nov 15 04:43:00 GMT 2003
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 09:48:46AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>It is fairly unusual for PATH_MAX to be many times greater than what is
>>support by pathconf.
Yes, I've already (obviously?) been to SUSv3. I wasn't talking about
standards. I was talking about common practice.
If you have a common practice web site that you want to show me then
that might be a convincing argument. Otherwise, I'll have to fall back
on my personal UNIX experience.
I'm not vetoing the change because PATH_MAX is potentially large. I was
kind of hoping (because I'm in incurable optimist) to start a discussion
with people who were familiar with packages that used PATH_MAX. How
SUSv3 defines PATH_MAX is irrelevant to existing programs.
More information about the Cygwin-patches