> On 16 Apr 2023, at 12:28, Bruno Haible <br...@clisp.org> wrote:
>
> I presented the test results:
>> - hello-3: no gnulib, just AC_SYS_LARGEFILE_REQUIRED
>> - hello-4: no gnulib, just AC_SYS_YEAR2038_REQUIRED
>> - testdir3: a gnulib testdir for the modules largefile-required stat
>> - testdir4: a gnulib testdir for the modules year2038-required stat
>>
>> mingw64 mingw32 msvc64 msvc32
>>
>> hello-3 OK OK "support not detected" -> fail
>> hello-4 OK OK "support not detected" -> fail
>> testdir3 OK OK OK OK
>> testdir4 OK OK OK OK
>
> Now, one could argue that in the above table the outcome should be:
>
> mingw64 mingw32 msvc64 msvc32
>
> hello-3 OK OK "support not detected" -> fail
> hello-4 OK OK OK OK
> testdir3 OK OK OK OK
> testdir4 OK OK OK OK
>
> since in hello-4 the maintainer has only asked for year 2038
> support, not for large files support. And the dependency from year 2038
> support to large files support exists only in glibc (since the glibc
> developers found it pointless to add a 'struct stat' variant with
> 32-bit off_t and 64-bit time_t).
It is pointless indeed, it would require another 4 compat symbols with extra
translation layer, further complexity for symbol redirection, and even more
testing to check for any broken state (as we found while testing some some
specific architectures).
