Re: Query about <dirent.h>

Article View: comp.std.unix

Article #125

#125

From: John Sovereign
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1989 18:01

19 lines
1191 bytes

From: jms@Apple.COM (John Sovereign)

Since NAME_MAX is filesystem-dependent, NAME_MAX is probably a poor choice for
an implementation's definition of d_name, unless the implementation KNOWS that
it will only talk to filesystems which limit filenames to NAME_MAX.

In article <448@longway.TIC.COM> dmr@research.att.com (Dennis Ritchie) writes:
>From: dmr@research.att.com (Dennis Ritchie)
>
>I don't have the POSIX wording at hand, but if it forbids
>`struct dirent d = *readdir(dp)' then it is flaky.
>

POSIX (and the "historical implementation" which introduced this) is flaky.

John Sovereign
jms@apple.com

Volume-Number: Volume 17, Number 77

Technical Details

Message-ID: <449@longway.TIC.COM>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unix

References: <448@longway.TIC.COM>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unix
From: jms@Apple.COM (John Sovereign)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: Query about <dirent.h>
Summary: NAME_MAX filesystem-dependent
Message-ID: <449@longway.TIC.COM>
Date: 30 Nov 89 18:01:02 GMT
References: <448@longway.TIC.COM>
Sender: std-unix@longway.TIC.COM
Reply-To: jms@Apple.COM (John Sovereign)
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA
Lines: 19
Approved: jsq@longway.tic.com (Moderator, John S. Quarterman)

Reply to Parent Message