[PATCH] Fix readdir_r with long file names

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 06/10/2013 03:20 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 06/07/2013 04:41 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
>> Yes. I just disagree with recommending that portable applications
>> use readdir_r (as discussed on the Austin Group tracker/list, it
>> has major problems related to NAME_MAX not being mandatory) and
>> with the idea (by someone else, not you) to add a readdir4 rather
>> than just deprecating caller-provided buffers for reading
>> directories. Those were the only things I was commenting on.
> 
> Carlos, what do you think about this?  I tend to agree with Rich here
> and would like to back out this part of your suggestions again.
 
I'm OK with backing out the recommendation of readdir_r as a portable
alternative, but the text should instead say *why* readdir_r is not 
a good portable alternative. That is to say we should specifically
dissuade the use if that's actually the truth.

Cheers,
Carlos.