Re: [libc-coord] Re: [musl] Re: regression in man pages for interfaces using loff_t

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2023-07-01 06:36, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:

loff_t * can be incompatible with off64_t * as well as off_t *.

loff_t * cannot be incompatible with the off64_t in the current implementation. The same goes for off_t, if you compile with _FILE_OFFSET_BITS set to 64.

As you suggest, a future implementation might change this. But if anything this strengthens the case for the documentation avoiding these pseudo-off_t types, as they're less stable.


the documentation change can break the api of an implementation,
it is not weakening the spec.

Are you talking about the doc change from loff_t to off64_t? If so, I agree that change invalidated the musl implementation. When I wrote "I don't see any incompatibility with glibc and the changes I proposed" I was talking about the patch proposed here:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-man/31b53a8d-7cf4-b3a3-371f-a5723963383e@xxxxxxxxxxx/2-0001-off64_t-prefer-off_t-for-splice-etc.patch

As far as I can see, this proposed patch doesn't invalidate any implementation. If it does invalidate one could you please give an example call that follows the rules of the proposed patch but does not work on glibc or on musl?



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Documentation]     [Netdev]     [Linux Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux