Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk Message-ID: <3BC5F4AF.A9459A35@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 20:36:15 +0100 From: Richard Dawe X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586) X-Accept-Language: de,fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: Resend: DJGPP and files > 2GB References: <200110110719 DOT JAA23930 AT lws256 DOT lu DOT erisoft DOT se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Martin Stromberg wrote: > > Richard said: [snip] > > off_t does not allow us to handle the full extent of files > 2GB in > > size, because off_t is too small right now. Hence this thread. > > No. You don't get it. It the same exercise again. You pass in the > negative number and it doesn't matter. It will seek to the right > place. I'm not convinced by your argument. Consider relative seeks: lseek(fd, SEEK_SET, 2GB - 10); lseek(fd, SEEK_CUR, 1GB); Now I want to seek backwards 2.5GB. How would I do that? How does lseek know which direction I want to go for relative seeks with |offset| > 2GB? Incidentally, why does lseek check whether the file descriptor is a pipe or not, after it's done the INT21h call? Shouldn't it do it before the interrupt? Thanks, bye, Rich =] -- Richard Dawe http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/