Follow-up Comment #2, sr #111111 (group autoconf): https://savannah.gnu.org/support/index.php?&func=detailitem&item_id=111111&;
My current solution is publicly available - https://gitlab.com/secsh/pkixssh/-/blob/master/m4/android.m4 . In brief: ac_cv_sys_largefile_opts='none needed' ac_cv_sys_file_offset_bits=no I'm would like to use a stable solution. Documentation states we to expect additional modifications. This is reason to open this issue. So use "_cv_" model or ...? Another clear thing is that Android OS will never correct 64-bits for 32-devices. This support will remain buggy. No surprises - devices with short life cycle. Remark: In the past build (NDK) uses header files per API level. This model does not have issue with "large files" support. If I remember well issue start with use of so called "unified model" for header files. Now this is the only model used in build process. As alternative I could call for other "host" except Android. For instance: case "$host" in *-*-linux-android*) ;; *) AC_SYS_LARGEFILE ;; esac From my point of view such code is not reliable - another macro could use large file as prerequisite. In such case code above is useless as from "another macro" 64-bit will be activated. What could be alternative solution? * macro redefinition in project code :/ * update macro "large files" to exclude Android :( * other _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.gnu.org/support/?111111> _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
