Re: SCSH status and future

On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 04:51:38PM -0500, Daniel Hagerty wrote:

> > I had already removed features to work around the lack of support
> > of large files (64 bit C off_t type) in scsh. These features are
> > now back in with the switch to guile.

>     I doubt your problem is actually 64 bit off_t, but something
> more subtle.  My OS has had 64 bit off_t on 32 bit systems for a
> decade.  scsh works without problems except for the usual caveats
> for something that will only allow less that 31 bits at lseek and
> friends.

And stat(). Just create a > 2GB file and try to get its size. Your
scsh script aborts with an error. That's the "usual caveats". It keeps
me from using scsh to delete files of size 0 in a directory containing
other (big) files. Pretty limiting.

>     As for general lack of 64 bit cleanliness, you probably don't need
> 64 bits worth of addressing from your scripting language.  While it
> would be more reasonable if it did (gratuitous limits are bad), in
> practice, you will probably find that you're using the wrong tool for
> the job long before you hit address space limitations.  Is there any
> reason why you can't build scsh as a 32 bit binary?

I have to compile the libraries it needs as a 32 bit binary
first. While theoretically possible, having a distribution packaging
system that supports the multiple architectures supported by the
hardware is not there yet. (And conflicts with LSB support and that
kind of boring things.)

-- 
Lionel