To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=76159
------- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Apr 10 15:03:37 +0000 2007 ------- ericb->sb >This starts getting silly. Not exactly : your expertise helps us to see more clear here. > Issue 64769 introduces an #ifndef >_SC_GETPW_R_SIZE_MAX block to sal/osl/unx/system.h, defining it to 71 if not >yet >defined. Why 71? No idea, but probably because this value is not used, yes. BTW, I have found something interesting here : http://mail-index.netbsd.org/pkgsrc-bugs/ 2006/06/07/0009.html 64 is proposed in this case. And if bufsize does have the same sense as buflen, 1024 for buffer length seems to be a big value, no ? > I guess 71 is an arbitrary, hopefully unused value thatcauses sysconf(71) to > fail with EINVAL. I think so too. Another link I found, directly defines buf_len = sysconf(_SC_GETPW_R_SIZE_MAX) equal to 1024 if returned buf_len is < 0 See : http://bugzilla.mcs.anl.gov/globus/show_bug.cgi?id=3902 To be honest, things are not so clear (hopefully, this is fixed in Mac OS X10.4) Waiting, I'll try your code and verify it works on Panther. Thank you very much for your time ! --------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments. http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
