X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:53:17 +0300
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT gnu DOT org>
Subject: Re: gcc difficulties on MSDOS 6.22 with LFN driver installed
In-reply-to: <CAA2C=vB1pkVA1kTz7AtO=OfbEWj13=yXyaqOd_sCS7TYxpzZyA@mail.gmail.com>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-id: <83aaam0x6a.fsf@gnu.org>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-012-Sender: halo1 AT inter DOT net DOT il
References: <201108310027 DOT 22056 DOT juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de> <E1Qye2f-0005Iu-TI AT fencepost DOT gnu DOT org> <201108312117 DOT 54522 DOT juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de> <j3op85$567$1 AT speranza DOT aioe DOT org> <038ae4ff-44f2-4ad2-b806-a6ed9b6085a2 AT o9g2000vbo DOT googlegroups DOT com> <83zkincty6 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <e5b1540d-525e-48b9-9b15-59e9ba823a23 AT s2g2000vby DOT googlegroups DOT com> <CAA2C=vA1fwBnmJh-L0g4Rw+BdoSD4VBXGd2WP-W5dws7KGFA-Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <83pqjiuccr DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <lNOdnV5dhsOUAvzTnZ2dnUVZ_gKdnZ2d AT earthlink DOT com> <CAA2C=vB1pkVA1kTz7AtO=OfbEWj13=yXyaqOd_sCS7TYxpzZyA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by delorie.com id p839rKKF021251
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 11:23:06 +0300
> From: Ozkan Sezer <sezeroz AT gmail DOT com>
> 
> On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 6:28 AM, Charles Sandmann <cwsdpmi AT earthlink DOT net> wrote:
> > I think these are related to the ability of some systems to support
> > files > 2GB in size, which are not directly LFN related.  There needs
> > to be a different test in the code for this handling before it is used
> > (requires LFN, but LFN does not necessarily provide big file support).
> > This was one of the issues that kept V2.04 in beta.
> 
> IIUC, the error would show itself if the accessed file is really >= 2GB,
> however Juan's test was simply running gcc to compile a hello.c and I
> don't think that gcc is trying to access any such large file in the process.

You are probably right.  However, Charles's point is worth taking,
because we also fail these two functions with EOVERFLOW when the
registers returned by 71A6 indicate that the file size is > 2GB.  So
it could make sense to treat each of these 2 cases differently, where
we currently don't.

Again, running under GDB to see which of these is actually the case
for GCC will allow us to be smarter.