| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
| Date: | Sat, 21 Sep 2002 16:38:59 +0300 |
| From: | "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> |
| Sender: | halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il |
| To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
| Message-Id: | <1225-Sat21Sep2002163858+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> |
| X-Mailer: | emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 |
| In-reply-to: | <3D8C3C7F.16730.1730FC@localhost> (snowball3@softhome.net) |
| Subject: | Re: working toward a realpath implementation |
| References: | <3D8B92AB DOT 7174 DOT 567AAC AT localhost> (snowball3 AT softhome DOT net) <3D8C3C7F DOT 16730 DOT 1730FC AT localhost> |
| Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
| Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
| X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
| X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
> From: "Mark E." <snowball3 AT softhome DOT net> > Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 09:31:43 -0400 > > If your saying PATH_MAX is too large, then perhaps it should be made smaller? It's too long if used for ENAMETOOLONG. In all other cases, it's okay to have a large value. I don't know why did DJ define PATH_MAX to be 512 -- perhaps Posix states that as a minimum?
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |