Date:	Tue, 29 Apr 1997 08:35:00 -0400
Message-Id:	<199704291235.IAA00413@delorie.com>
From:	DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
CC:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.970429122423.23034V-100000@is> (message from Eli
	Zaretskii on Tue, 29 Apr 1997 12:29:14 +0300 (IDT))
Subject:	Re: Dynamic pathconf?

> Is there any reason why `pathconf' always returns static info?  For 
> example, the NAME_MAX and PATH_MAX parameters can change at run time, if 
> you are on an LFN platform, but `pathconf' always reports the low 
> DOS-based values.  Does POSIX specify such static behavior?

No reason.  As long as they return valid values, they can figure out
the values however they want.

> If not, then I can post the necessary patches (they are trivial).  Then 
> we could use `pathconf' as a vehicle to make DJGPP ports of Unix programs 
> aware of the maximum length of the filename on any given filesystem.  
> Currently, the ports use `_USE_LFN' macro for that purpose, but that is 
> inherently DJGPP-specific and requires #ifdef __DJGPP__, whereas 
> `pathconf' is POSIX.

Sure, go ahead.

- Raw text -