Date:	Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:31:46 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	"Peter J. Farley III" <pjfarley AT banet DOT net>
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Locking fcntl changes #2
In-Reply-To:	<5.0.2.1.0.20001213204815.025a7ec0@pop5.banet.net>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1001214113129.25353C-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Peter J. Farley III wrote:

>  >So I think it would be easier for you to dump filelength and use
>  >llseek in all cases, including the FAT16 branch.  In other words,
>  >expand filelength's guts inline and replace lseek with llseek.
> 
> Or just change filelength to use llseek.  Isn't that a better 
> solution?

Perhaps.  But I didn't want to add yet another cleanup job to what you
need to do ;-)

> Of course, if the definition of filelength insists on a long 
> result, wrong results can still be returned.  If that's the case, what 
> about an "l" version of filelength (though "lfilelength" seems a bit of 
> a cumbersome name, IMHO) which returns a long long?

filelength is a compatibility function, so a variant for large files
should follow name conventions on the platforms which have such a
variant.  Can someone look and suggest a name?

- Raw text -