Your message dated Fri, 02 Jan 2004 02:33:26 +0900
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#225304: libc6-dev: OPEN_MAX undeclared after using limits.h
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 28 Dec 2003 15:34:54 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Dec 28 09:34:53 2003
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from nlb2.siportal.it (nlb2.ede.it) [217.27.113.72]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1AacfJ-0006Oh-00; Sun, 28 Dec 2003 09:17:13 -0600
Received: from gont.earthsea.ea (unverified [62.123.94.144]) by nlb2.ede.it
(Vircom SMTPRS 5.3.232) with SMTP id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sun, 28 Dec 2003 16:13:10 +0100
Received: by gont.earthsea.ea (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id EBCAD14FB7; Sun, 28 Dec 2003 16:17:07 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Simone Piccardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: libc6-dev: OPEN_MAX undeclared after using limits.h
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.37
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 16:17:07 +0100
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin
2.60-master.debian.org_2003_11_25-bugs.debian.org_2003_12_15
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on master.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no
version=2.60-master.debian.org_2003_11_25-bugs.debian.org_2003_12_15
X-Spam-Level:
Package: libc6-dev
Version: 2.3.2.ds1-10
Severity: normal
I'm trying to use OPEN_MAX in a sample program. But it get not declared also
after including limits.h.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux gont.earthsea.ea 2.4.21 #4 Thu Aug 14 22:23:43 CEST 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Versions of packages libc6-dev depends on:
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-10 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii linux-kernel-headers 2.5.999-test7-bk-10 Linux Kernel Headers for developme
-- no debconf information
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 225304-done) by bugs.debian.org; 1 Jan 2004 19:39:34 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jan 01 13:39:33 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from omega.webmasters.gr.jp (webmasters.gr.jp) [218.44.239.78]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1Ac6hL-00055B-00; Thu, 01 Jan 2004 11:33:27 -0600
Received: from omega.webmasters.gr.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by webmasters.gr.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 58FCFDEB7C; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 02:33:26 +0900 (JST)
Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 02:33:26 +0900
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Simone Piccardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bug#225304: libc6-dev: OPEN_MAX undeclared after using limits.h
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.9.9 (Unchained Melody) SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya)
FLIM/1.14.3 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Unebigory=F2mae?=) APEL/10.3 Emacs/21.2
(i386-debian-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.3 - "Ushinoya")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin
2.60-master.debian.org_2003_11_25-bugs.debian.org_2003_12_29
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on master.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no
version=2.60-master.debian.org_2003_11_25-bugs.debian.org_2003_12_29
X-Spam-Level:
At Tue, 30 Dec 2003 03:29:59 +0000,
Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 04:17:07PM +0100, Simone Piccardi wrote:
> > Package: libc6-dev
> > Version: 2.3.2.ds1-10
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > I'm trying to use OPEN_MAX in a sample program. But it get not declared also
> > after including limits.h.
>
> This is deliberate and not a bug. For example,
> /usr/include/bits/local_lim.h says:
>
> /* The kernel header pollutes the namespace with the NR_OPEN symbol
> and defines LINK_MAX although filesystems have different maxima. A
> similar thing is true for OPEN_MAX: the limit can be changed at
> runtime and therefore the macro must not be defined. Remove this
> after including the header if necessary. */
>
> POSIX does not require OPEN_MAX to be defined as a macro. If such a
> macro is not defined, you should use sysconf(_SC_OPEN_MAX) to discover
> the current value. See 'info libc "General Limits"', particularly the
> first two paragraphs.
Exactly. I've closed this bug.
Regards,
-- gotom
