[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: PATH_MAX with mingw

From: Jim Meyering
Subject: Re: PATH_MAX with mingw
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 00:42:07 +0200

[I wrote:
> Hi Sylvain,
> Thanks for letting us know.
> For starters, in code intended to be portable, it's best not
> to rely on PATH_MAX, if at all possible.  At a bare minimum,
> don't use it as an array size, and don't try to allocate
> PATH_MAX bytes from the heap.  On some systems, PATH_MAX
> can be very large.  On the Hurd, it's not defined at all.
> As for adjusting the code to let mingw applications use
> four more bytes, it sounds like it wouldn't hurt, but isn't
> there a definition of PATH_MAX in <limits.h>?
> It looks like there used to be, at least.

FYI, I sent the above over 6 hours ago:

Here's a summary of the delays derived from Received-by headers:

                      rho.meyering.net   Sat Aug 25 18:18:29 2007 +0200 (CEST)
                     smtp3-g19.free.fr ?                2 seconds
                     smtp3-g19.free.fr                  0 seconds
                  monty-python.gnu.org                  2 seconds
                         lists.gnu.org ?                6.2 hours !!!!
                         lists.gnu.org ?                1 seconds
                         lists.gnu.org ?                1 seconds
                         lists.gnu.org ?                7 seconds
                      rho.meyering.net                  1 seconds

Can anyone explain the delay?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]