Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 13:10:39 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199710121710.NAA05212@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.3.91.971012161213.8870E-100000@is> (message from Eli
	Zaretskii on Sun, 12 Oct 1997 16:14:08 +0200 (IST))
Subject: Re: Should off_t become unsigned?
Precedence: bulk


> Then POSIX has no way to support files larger than 2GB, unless you go to 
> 64-bit ints, right?

POSIX doesn't say that off_t has to be 32 bits, but for most
implementations there is a 2G limit for files before they get
difficult to deal with.

> I think we shouldn't be POSIX adepts on this one.  If we make it 
> unsigned, what specifically would break?

lseek() would be unable to return an error, nor would you be able to
seek backwards with SEEK_CUR or SEEK_END.  Same for file locking with
fcntl().