At 07:15 AM 4/10/2002 +1000, Giles Lean wrote: > > My limited reading of off_t stuff now suggests that it would be brave to > > assume it is even a simple 64 bit number (or even 3 32 bit numbers). > >What are you reading?? If you find a platform with 64 bit file >offsets that doesn't support 64 bit integral types I will not just be >surprised but amazed.
Yes, but there is no guarantee that off_t is implemented as such, nor would we be wise to assume so (most docs say explicitly not to do so). > > Unless anyone knows of a documented way to get 64 bit uint/int file > > offsets, I don't see we have mush choice. > >If you're on a platform that supports large files it will either have >a straightforward 64 bit off_t or else will support the "large files >API" that is common on Unix-like operating systems. > >What are you trying to do, exactly? Again yes, but the problem is the same: we need a way of making the *value* of an off_t portable (not just assuming it's a int64). In general that involves knowing how to turn it into a more universal data type (eg. int64, or even a string). Does the large file API have functions for representing the off_t values that is portable across architectures? And is the API also portable? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Philip Warner | __---_____ Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \ (A.B.N. 75 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_ Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \ Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82 | ___________ | Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \| | --________-- PGP key available upon request, | / and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
