From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 24758 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2023 19:20:03 -0000 Received: from second.openwall.net (193.110.157.125) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 28 Jun 2023 19:20:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 4092 invoked by uid 550); 28 Jun 2023 19:20:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 4030 invoked from network); 28 Jun 2023 19:19:59 -0000 Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2023 21:19:47 +0200 From: Szabolcs Nagy To: Paul Eggert Cc: Rich Felker , linux-man@vger.kernel.org, musl@lists.openwall.com, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, libc-coord@lists.openwall.com Message-ID: <20230628191947.GE3630668@port70.net> Mail-Followup-To: Paul Eggert , Rich Felker , linux-man@vger.kernel.org, musl@lists.openwall.com, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, libc-coord@lists.openwall.com References: <20230628175329.GA16113@brightrain.aerifal.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: [musl] Re: regression in man pages for interfaces using loff_t * Paul Eggert [2023-06-28 11:21:39 -0700]: > On 2023-06-28 10:53, Rich Felker wrote: > > The whole reason loff_t exists is to avoid this problem and make a > > type that's "always full width offset, regardless of _FILE_OFFSET_BITS > > or _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE" to match with the kernel expectation for these > > interfaces. > > Why can't off64_t be that type, as it is in glibc? I'm not seeing why we > need two names for the same type. umm because off64_t is not a defined type? https://godbolt.org/z/9sf6n8Y3e