Re: mingw and AC_SYS_LARGEFILE

2012-04-21 Thread Ray Satiro
> From: Bruno Haible >> 2012-04-15  Bruno Haible  >> >>         Large File Support for native Windows platforms. > >I've pushed this patch now. > >Bruno Hi Bruno, I compiled the latest wget and gnulib modules in msys and wget mingw build is able to properly resume large files again. Thank yo

Re: mingw and AC_SYS_LARGEFILE

2012-04-21 Thread Bruno Haible
> 2012-04-15 Bruno Haible > > Large File Support for native Windows platforms. I've pushed this patch now. Bruno

Re: mingw and AC_SYS_LARGEFILE

2012-04-15 Thread Bruno Haible
Hi Paul, > I'd omit the comment These comments are necessary for maintenance. When I (or Eric or anyone else in the future) modifies this code, we need to know which piece of code applies to which platforms, so that 1. we don't waste time modifying code that has no influence on the platfor

Re: mingw and AC_SYS_LARGEFILE

2012-04-15 Thread Paul Eggert
Just some very minor comments about comments --- On 04/15/2012 09:57 AM, Bruno Haible wrote: > +#if _GL_WINDOWS_64_BIT_OFF_T > +# undef fseeko > +# if HAVE__FSEEKI64 /* msvc, mingw64 */ I'd omit the comment, which was inserted in multiple places, as I find it more distracting than helpful. It's

Re: mingw and AC_SYS_LARGEFILE

2012-04-15 Thread Jim Meyering
Bruno Haible wrote: >> the new names, gl_LARGEFILE and USE_64_BIT_OFF_T >> sound like things that one would use and expect to be set (resp.) >> even on non-Windows systems. What do you think about changing >> the names to make it clear that they are useful only when building >> on mingw? > > gl_LA

Re: mingw and AC_SYS_LARGEFILE

2012-04-15 Thread Bruno Haible
Hi Jim, > the new names, gl_LARGEFILE and USE_64_BIT_OFF_T > sound like things that one would use and expect to be set (resp.) > even on non-Windows systems. What do you think about changing > the names to make it clear that they are useful only when building > on mingw? gl_LARGEFILE is the macr

Re: mingw and AC_SYS_LARGEFILE

2012-04-15 Thread Bruno Haible
> the mingw64 headers provide a partial "Large File Support". > Namely, for > off_t >(lseek, ftruncate) >(fseeko, ftello) And even this partial support is only partially working. They define a function ftruncate64, and "#define ftruncate ftruncate64". This function 1) violates POSIX:

Re: mingw and AC_SYS_LARGEFILE

2012-04-15 Thread Bruno Haible
> My advice would be first to ask the currently active mingw development > group, namely the mingw64 project [5], whether they plan to add > "Large File Support" to their header files. It turns out, the mingw64 headers provide a *partial* "Large File Support". Namely, for off_t (lseek, ftrunc

Re: mingw and AC_SYS_LARGEFILE

2012-04-14 Thread Jim Meyering
Bruno Haible wrote: > Here's a proposed patch for Large File Support for native Windows platforms. > Tested on mingw, mingw64 (32-bit), MSVC 9. > > It turns out there's nothing to do with open(), creat() - because there is > no need for O_LARGEFILE on Windows - and also nothing to do with fopen(),

Re: mingw and AC_SYS_LARGEFILE

2012-04-14 Thread Bruno Haible
Here's a proposed patch for Large File Support for native Windows platforms. Tested on mingw, mingw64 (32-bit), MSVC 9. It turns out there's nothing to do with open(), creat() - because there is no need for O_LARGEFILE on Windows - and also nothing to do with fopen(), fgetpos(), fsetpos() - becaus

Re: mingw and AC_SYS_LARGEFILE

2012-04-12 Thread Bruno Haible
Hi, Ray Satiro wrote: > The gnulib fstat doc says: > "On platforms where off_t is a 32-bit type, stat may not correctly report the > size of files or block devices larger than 2 GB. The fix is to use the > AC_SYS_LARGEFILE macro. " > > Recently it was discovered that the latest versions of wget