On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 22:44:19 -0600 (CST), Matt Roberds wrote: > On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Jean Delvare wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 23:23:12 -0600 (CST), Matt Roberds wrote: > >> On Wed, 11 Feb 2009, Jean Delvare wrote: > >>> + char path[16 + NAME_MAX]; > >> > >> This says that the maximum length of the path to the config files is > >> 16 characters? Seems kind of short. > > > > Not really. There is no strong delimiter between the directory name > > and the configuration file name, what is limited is the total length. > > Ah, right. As long as NAME_MAX is huge this might not be a big deal. > > > Even including the full board manufacturer and model names in the > > configuration file name is hardly going to exceed 50 characters. > > A well-known businessman once said something about 640 KB. :) > > > I don't know the exact semantics of PATH_MAX but I suspect it includes > > all the directory names _and_ the file name, so adding MAX_NAME to it > > doesn't make sense. > > The GNU libc docs at > http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/libc/Limits-for-Files.html#Limits-for-Files > spell it out, citing POSIX. Note that it can be different for different OK, thanks for the pointer. > filesystems; you can ask at runtime if you really want to know: > http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/libc/Pathconf.html#Pathconf > On the other hand, the man page for pathconf on my system says "Some > returned values may be huge; they are not suitable for allocating > memory." I'd rather keep the code simple, and only change it if someone expresses an actual need for that. -- Jean Delvare
