Mail Archives: cygwin-developers/2003/01/22/10:58:01
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 10:47:04AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 11:29:19AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Hmm, I was trying to avoid that but I'm not getting to change newlib
> >for the necessary fpos_t changes. And, honestly, I hate digging in
> >newlib.
>
> I forget what the problem is here. Couldn't we just define fpos_t to
> be 64 bits?
We need 32 and 64 bit versions to support old and newly build apps,
same as off_t. Another problem is that off_t is used in the FILE
struct :-P
> > 1.5.0
>
> Yes, as I was drifting off to sleep last night, I realized that I'd
> awake to just this correction from you. :-)
Yeah, and I woke up this morning with pedantic mode switched on
so I couldn't resist ;-)
> Maybe the best plan would be to keep the 1.3.* branch around and start
> making drastic changes to 1.5.*. The first checkin could be device
> handling, since that is nearly ready. Then we could add 32/64 bit
> support. Eventually, around 1.5.8 or so, we could make 1.5 the latest
> release and trask 1.3.*
May I dream? Let's break binary compatibility with 1.3 and switch
over to 64 bit off_t/fpos_t etc and 32bit uid_t/gid_t once and for all.
No big chnanges to newlib needed then. We could get rid of all
func32/func64 function pairs... sounds like holiday on Hawaii.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.
- Raw text -