Re: [bug #30065] MAXPATHLEN breaks builds on GNU/Hurd

Richard Levitte <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.version-control.monotone.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
In message <[email protected]> on Wed, 28 Mar 2012 11:26:51 +0100, Francis Russell <[email protected]> said:

francis> On 28/03/12 09:27, Richard Levitte wrote:
francis> 
francis> > What did you have in mind?
francis> 
francis> To be honest, I think the big scary warning put me off more than the
francis> patch itself. Although I do note that the patch appears to use  variable
francis> length stack allocated arrays which aren't valid in C++.

Huh???  I thought that was one pretty big difference between C and
C++...  Maybe I'm mixing that up with GNUified C/C++...

francis> I guess I was thinking of something more like the attached
francis> (again untested), with the idea that the get_current_working_dir()
francis> implementations in both src/{unix,win32}/fs.cc could both use it since
francis> they both build strings from the buffer returned by getcwd (and the
francis> majority of added code would no longer be dead). I don't have much idea
francis> on monotone's policy on dynamic memory allocation and error handing for
francis> failures of it though.

I like your implementation, I say do it.
I dunno if what you say means you want to intermix src/netxx with
src/{unix/win32}...  I'd say don't, netxx is basically some bundled
source package, and I believe it should stay as independent as
possible, and just be used by monotone until something else replaces
it (someone mentioned libevent).  However, if you want to implement
the same thing in src/{unix,win32}/fs.cc, I say try it :-)

Cheers,
Richard

-- 
Richard Levitte                         [email protected]
                                        http://richard.levitte.org/

"Life is a tremendous celebration - and I'm invited!"
-- from a friend's blog, translated from Swedish
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.