On Sep 25, 12:40am, jeanyves.mig...@free.fr (Jean-Yves Migeon) wrote: -- Subject: Re: MAXNAMLEN vs NAME_MAX
| > My vote is to bump without versioning, what's yours? | | Hmm, what do you want to do there? Increase NAME_MAX or decrease MAXNAMLEN? | | I would do the latter; ffs, ext2 and lfs all seem to use 255 for | MAXNAMLEN. So, I cast my vote for "bump without versioning". If you decrease MAXNAMLEN you *must* version! Anyway we came from there, and there is no reason to move backwards. The change proposed is to make NAME_MAX match MAXNAMLEN without bumping. christos