----- Original Message ----- From: "Marcus Brinkmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Frederico S. Mu�oz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Neal H Walfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Brent Fulgham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 8:53 PM Subject: Re: Trying to compile
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 02:43:24PM +0100, Frederico S. Mu�oz wrote: > > Just for the record, is the correct way of dealing with the thousands of > > packages that have MAXPATHLEN (and PATHMAX et al.) issues > > Did you count them? There are probably hundreds, but not many (in Debian, > perhaps about 200-300, a couple of dozen fixed already). Umm, er, I meant hundreds :) I'm prolly under the wrong impression that they are a lot because the three packages I tried to compile all had them: tree, epic and openssh; but you know better, so they are prolly not as many as I tought. > > > is to change the > > code of every single one of them so that they can use the asprintf and > > alloca, etc? > > Yes. Ok. > > > BTW, I am thinking of taking an example from epic that used MAXPATHLEN and > > post it here with my change to it... that way you could tell me if I'm doing > > things the Right Way (dunno if this is the correct mailing list, if it isn't > > please tell me, i.e. is it better to go to bug-hurd?). > > Well, both are appropriate, but pick one. Well, will prolly stick to debian-hurd, but if anyone thinks it should be crossposted feel free to add a Cc. best regards, Frederico S. Mu�oz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
