From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18004 invoked by alias); 27 Sep 2003 22:21:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact overseers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: overseers-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 17996 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2003 22:21:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO redhat.com) (24.131.133.249) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Sep 2003 22:21:29 -0000 Received: by redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 201) id 0F1546C718; Sat, 27 Sep 2003 18:21:23 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 22:21:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: Ulrich Drepper Cc: Matthew Galgoci , Hans-Peter Nilsson , overseers@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: last days of htdig Message-ID: <20030927222123.GB20973@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Drepper , Matthew Galgoci , Hans-Peter Nilsson , overseers@sources.redhat.com References: <20030927152054.GB19912@redhat.com> <20030927215040.GB21136@redhat.com> <3F7609A8.7030909@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F7609A8.7030909@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-q3/txt/msg00240.txt.bz2 On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 03:05:28PM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote: >Christopher Faylor wrote: > >>>>I think we've already been over this ground, HP, but couldn't we >>>>just recompile htdig on the new kernel to bypass the 2G limit? >>> >>>Ewwwwww.... >> >> ? I said "kernel" when I really meant glibc but it could have been a >> real simple way to get things working quickly. > >??? glibc doesn't have a 2GB limit. You have to use the right >interfaces to get beyond 2GB (e.g. -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64), though. >Recompiling glibc cannot make this the default. You'd change the size >of all kinds of data types after which I doubt you can reboot the system. cgf said: I think we've already been over this ground, HP, but couldn't we just recompile htdig on the new kernel to bypass the 2G limit? then he said: I said "kernel" when I really meant glibc but it could have been a real simple way to get things working quickly. Correcting the sentence would give us: I think we've already been over this ground, HP, but couldn't we just recompile htdig on the new glibc to bypass the 2G limit? The "new glibc" in this case would be a glibc (and kernel) from 2003, when the new sourceware was brought online, rather than one from 1999, or whenever Jason and company put the old sourceware together. I wasn't suggesting that a rebuild of glibc would be necessary. That would be counter to my attempts to standardize sourceware so that I can just run 'up2date' and not worry about anything breaking. I guess I was assuming that the newer glibc would deal better with larger file sizes, which may have been an incorrect assumption. Perhaps the old glibc worked fine, too. Regardless, I certainly know that it is possible to manipulate files over 2GB on linux without rebuilding glibc. cgf