| Ticket UUID: | d690400d07e59286433b454dc7a5f0e5974dff94 | |||
| Title: | Remove _LARGEFILE_SOURCE64 typo? | |||
| Type: | Patch | Version: | 8.6.13 | |
| Submitter: | chrstphrchvz | Created on: | 2023-03-12 07:17:37 | |
| Subsystem: | 52. Portability Support | Assigned To: | jan.nijtmans | |
| Priority: | 5 Medium | Severity: | Cosmetic | |
| Status: | Closed | Last Modified: | 2023-03-21 11:15:38 | |
| Resolution: | Fixed | Closed By: | chrstphrchvz | |
| Closed on: | 2023-03-21 11:15:38 | |||
| Description: |
Did _LARGEFILE_SOURCE64 actually exist in some platform’s header files? I am increasingly convinced it never did, and that any mention of it can be removed from Tcl; see attached patch. [1287638] says it was needed according to https://web.archive.org/web/20060226103406/http://www.redhat.com/docs/wp/solaris_port/x1609.html. But what if it was just a typo in ancient RHEL docs? I downloaded and extracted the SRPMs for glibc-2.3.2 from RHEL 3 and glibc-2.3.4 from RHEL 4, and could only find occurrences of _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE, not _LARGEFILE_SOURCE64. Looking for "_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE" on Google reports over 11k results, versus "149 results" for "_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE"; I notice many results of the latter which are from Tcl/TEA (and downstream copies), but none from a C standard library implementation’s header files. On Google Books, there are about 29 results for "_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE" and 0 for "_LARGEFILE_SOURCE64". | |||
| User Comments: |
jan.nijtmans added on 2023-03-20 14:25:06:
Thanks! It indeed looks like _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE is a typo. | |||
Attachments:
- rm-largefile-source64.diff [download] added by chrstphrchvz on 2023-03-12 07:17:46. [details]