PATH_MAX >> NAME_MAX.
Aha. But since we now never use more than NAME_MAX and suffix is stack
allocated would it be good to make it NAME_MAX lenght?
> patch v2:
>
> From 4023ad1a81f31ae404c2959bad752d05ad2bb3b9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: "Frank Ch. Eigler"
> Da
ase debugging, uncomment:
> > +set -x
>
> Missing # ? Or use it just unconditionally?
I *love* set -x unconditionally, so tweaked the comment.
(IMO test-subr.sh should set this for all our tests.)
patch v2:
>From 4023ad1a81f31ae404c2959bad752d05ad2bb3b9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
F
Hi Frank,
On Thu, 2024-10-10 at 17:24 -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> From be79d138989b9968f9c687ef62cc91b5b93e32b5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: "Frank Ch. Eigler"
> Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 16:30:19 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] PR32218: debuginfod-client: support very lon
>From be79d138989b9968f9c687ef62cc91b5b93e32b5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Frank Ch. Eigler"
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 16:30:19 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] PR32218: debuginfod-client: support very long source file
names
debuginfod clients & servers may sometimes encounter very
