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
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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.