On Thu, 1 Feb 2024 09:04:47 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> I added a compile-time check that hotspot on AIX is indeed compiled with
> _LARGE_FILES.
>
> @MBaesken Are you happy with this PR now?
Thanks for adding this, I approved the PR .
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jd
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 12:25:47 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> In the same spirit as
>> [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we should adapt
>> the AIX-specific code in hotspot so it uses the well-defined posix ``
>> functions, instead of `64`. By setting the define _LAR
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 12:25:47 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> In the same spirit as
>> [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we should adapt
>> the AIX-specific code in hotspot so it uses the well-defined posix ``
>> functions, instead of `64`. By setting the define _LAR
On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 08:49:58 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> I suspect this worry of yours were more directed at the change for the JDK
Yes it is more a general worry, not especially related to Hotspot.
We could also add some kind of check (e.g. static assert or configure check)
to address it
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 12:25:47 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> In the same spirit as
>> [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we should adapt
>> the AIX-specific code in hotspot so it uses the well-defined posix ``
>> functions, instead of `64`. By setting the define _LAR
> In the same spirit as
> [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we should adapt
> the AIX-specific code in hotspot so it uses the well-defined posix ``
> functions, instead of `64`. By setting the define _LARGE_FILES, this
> will make `` behave as `64`, just as _FILE_OFFSE
