From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30954 invoked by alias); 27 Sep 2003 15:54:25 -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 30853 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2003 15:54:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dair.pair.com) (209.68.1.49) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Sep 2003 15:54:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 38779 invoked by uid 20157); 27 Sep 2003 15:54:23 -0000 Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 27 Sep 2003 15:54:23 -0000 Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 15:54:00 -0000 From: Hans-Peter Nilsson X-X-Sender: hp@dair.pair.com To: Christopher Faylor cc: overseers@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: last days of htdig In-Reply-To: <20030927152054.GB19912@redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2003-q3/txt/msg00232.txt.bz2 On Sat, 27 Sep 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote: > I think we've already been over this ground, Nah, not really. I think I mentioned a vague hunch that there were some large-file-patches for the kernel, allowing >2G (or better, 4G) files and that they would help. But I think that was far from reality, or at least reality of today(s kernel). > HP, but couldn't we > just recompile htdig on the new kernel to bypass the 2G limit? Off the top of my head, I think gnu "sort", sizeof int and sizeof long (or if we're lucky, just size_t :-) would be the obvious open sores^Wissues. Are we on 64-bit iron yet? When, when, when...? :-) :-) :-) brgds, H-P