Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:33:37 -0400 | | From | "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <> | | Subject | Re: OFFTOPIC: e2fsprogs and +2Gb partitions | |
From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@cygnus.com>
Date: 13 Jun 1998 09:05:00 -0700
The actions for both are the same, it's only that when incompatible
interface are available they'll also will be used. If in this case on
Linux the llseek function is simply not available people are forced to
use the right way.
I think you've completely missed one of the threads of the last weeks.
People complained that Linux programs are so poorly portable. The
reaction from those who wrote these programs was that they didn't know
better since they don't have other machines to test.
Actually, e2fsprogs was very portable; I specifically made sure it ran
on multiple platforms, including Solaris (which at the time supported
llseek, and not the LFS interfaces).
To say that llseek() is Linux-specific is really lame. As other pointed
out, AIX and Solaris also supported it, and it predates the LFS spec.
llseek() was a de-facto industry standard. The fact that glibc thought
nothing of breaking a de-facto industry standard, and in a really stupid
way (i.e., removing the prototype while leaving the function call in
libc --- thus fooling my autoconf test which up until that point worked
just fine under Linux, Solaris, and AIX), was what I was complaining
about.
You keep conveniently ignoring this point....
- Ted
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
|  |