Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 12 Mar 1999 13:57:59 -0500 | From | "David A. Greene" <> | Subject | Re: struct stat |
| |
Albert D. Cahalan wrote: > > Matthew Wilcox writes: > > > I looked up Single Unix and it says... > [...] > > So it is quite clear that one can reasonably expect to compare st_dev > > with the = operator, and therefore glibc is in error. > > No surprise there. They use a 56-bit major and a 8-bit minor too! > They will need to redo everything for ino_t and others anyway. > > In your case, change __dev_t to __u32 (which you may define) and > add padding every place that __dev_t was used. Assuming you are > using a PC, add your padding after the __dev_t.
Ok, that's a reasonable fix for the short term. Except what happens when are machines get upgraded again? I have to change things again...
> > [I don't know the address for libc-hackers; can someone forward this > > please?] > > Tell them to wait for the kernel next time rather than trying to > decide Linux data types all by themselves.
I don't know the list for the libc-hackers either, which is another reason I posted to linux-kernel. This is a serious bug in libc and needs to be fixed ASAP.
-Dave
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |