From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id: <10206142111.AA17751@clio.rice.edu>
Subject: Re: DJGPP and the Large File Summit (LFS)
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 16:11:43 -0500 (CDT)
In-Reply-To: <3D0A28A4.3329742C@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> from "Richard Dawe" at Jun 14, 2002 06:32:20 PM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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
Precedence: bulk

> I've just started working on getting Large File Summit (LFS) support in DJGPP.
> Basically this is a way of supporting files which exceed the number of bytes
> representable by a positive signed 32b integer, i.e.: 2GB - 1B. LFS has been
> integrated into the new POSIX standard.

Can you have files > 4Gb with the extended DOS APIs?

One thing I've always thought is that lseek and llseek should be the
same code, either with a compile define or a common stub routine.  We
also have many places in the libc which do seeks via int calls instead
of calling a common low level seek.  There is at least one other routine
I've seen that was essentially a clone of another routine (and should
be fixed, but I can't remember right now).

In general I think doing things to make the code more standard with other
platforms is always a good idea...