Date:	Sun, 31 Jan 1999 16:03:46 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
cc:	DJGPP-WORKERS <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: FAT32 (xstat.c)
In-Reply-To:	<199901311220.NAA08437@father.ludd.luth.se>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.990131160049.19083A-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Martin Str|mberg wrote:

> So if we start at LONG_MAX for _all_ file systems that needs invented
> inode numbers, we won't break anything?

No, nothing should get broken by this.  The inode is a 32-bit int, so it 
can be any 32-bit number.

But I suggest to use INT_MAX, not LONG_MAX, since st_inode is declared 
int (ino_t, actually, but that's just a typedef).  Somebody, some day 
might actually make long be 64-bit.

- Raw text -