This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: For masochists: the leap o faith

On Fri, 2003-11-21 at 21:25, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 07:58:36AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> > 
> > > I would prefer to change PATH_MAX and MAXPATHLEN to an arbitrary big
> > > value as, e. g. the same as on Linux, 4096, or even the biggest possible
> > > plus one: 32768.  The latter is probably the better value.  So my choice
> > > is a)
> > 
> > Ok. What should we set CYG_MAX_PATH to initially then? I think we should
> > start at 4K, until we've seen whether there are any stack size issues.
> I think we should get rid of static buffers in most cases.  Some of them
> might be kept in place, returning to MAX_PATH, the others should use
> another technique, like alloca.  As I see it, CYG_MAX_PATH should be just
> a temporary measure.

"Stack issues", not static buffers - or did you mean 'stack' buffers?

Anyway, yes, we should tune each individual thing to an appropriate
strategy - self managing objects, alloc etc.

However, CYG_MAX_PATH is simply decoupling the win32 ANSI path limit
from our internal path limit. If and when we don't have an effective
internal limit anymore, sure it can go.


GPG key available at: <>.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]