[Bug libc/13575] SSIZE_MAX defined as LONG_MAX is inconsistent with SIZE_MAX, when __WORDSIZE != 64

["soltys at ziu dot info" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13575

--- Comment #3 from Michal Soltys <soltys at ziu dot info> 2012-01-10 01:29:02 UTC ---
@Joseph

Thanks for clarification about size_t/ssize_t sizes.

@Ulrich

But for ssize_t type, the definition comes from glibc headers, not gcc. Apart
from what Joseph clarified - what I meant in context of SSIZE_MAX was analogous
(even if regarding the very opposite thing now) as in:

http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-hacker/2002-08/msg00031.html

that solution seemed more proper with reference to how ssize_t
is defined in glibc headers, which for __WORDSIZE == 32 always comes down to
(int), unless overriden locally. If SSIZE_MAX constant is to accurately reflect
ssize_t type, then that would be more correct than just defaulting to LONG_MAX
unconditionally ?

Thanks for the reply, even if a rough one.

As the bug report somewhat mismatches the actual issue, would it be ok to open
proper one, with patch based on the old mailing post above ? If not, then just
ignore the reply and forget it.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.