[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?
