Change large file support to more portable #2

已合併
SlavekB 將 1 次提交從 feat/portable-large-file-support 合併至 master 5 年前
obache 已留言 5 年前
協作者

I believe lseek64/off64_t is only supported for some platforms (glibc and solaris ?).

KDE_CHECK_LARGEFILE will set sufficient compiler flags to enable 64bit capable lseek/off_t,
so it is portable to use the autoconf macro and lseek/off_t instead of lseek64/off64_t with
-D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE.

I believe lseek64/off64_t is only supported for some platforms (glibc and solaris ?). KDE_CHECK_LARGEFILE will set sufficient compiler flags to enable 64bit capable lseek/off_t, so it is portable to use the autoconf macro and lseek/off_t instead of lseek64/off64_t with -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE.
擁有者

Please correct the commit log – WIP probably should not be part of the commit log and there is a typo chnage × change.

Please correct the commit log – WIP probably should not be part of the commit log and there is a typo chnage × change.
Ghost 已留言 5 年前

Talking about portability, shouldn't "-D_GNU_SOURCE" be changed for "-D_DEFAULT_SOURCE" in kttsd/players/alsaplayer/Makefile.am?

Talking about portability, shouldn't "-D_GNU_SOURCE" be changed for "-D_DEFAULT_SOURCE" in kttsd/players/alsaplayer/Makefile.am?
擁有者

Replacing _BSD_SOURCE, _SVID_SOURCE, _GNU_SOURCE with _DEFAULT_SOURCE has already been done by Michele some time ago. Some occurrences appear to have been omitted. I leave this for @MicheleC to check.

Replacing _BSD_SOURCE, _SVID_SOURCE, _GNU_SOURCE with _DEFAULT_SOURCE has already been done by Michele some time ago. Some occurrences appear to have been omitted. I leave this for @MicheleC to check.
擁有者

_GNU_SOURCE was not replaced. During the replacement of _BSD_SOURCE and _SVID_SOURCE, I also tested replacing _GNU_SOURCE with _DEFAULT_SOURCE but this led to compile errors since _GNU_SOURCE makes GNU extensions available.
_GNU_SOURCE still needs to be used.

_GNU_SOURCE was not replaced. During the replacement of _BSD_SOURCE and _SVID_SOURCE, I also tested replacing _GNU_SOURCE with _DEFAULT_SOURCE but this led to compile errors since _GNU_SOURCE makes GNU extensions available. _GNU_SOURCE still needs to be used.
擁有者

I tested build on Debian 10 (Buster) amd64, i386 and armhf – all successful.

There is a question: When building with CMake, there is no equivalent test for large files support. In some CMakeLists.txt we can see hard-coded _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE=1 – for example tdelibs/tdeio/CMakeLists.txt, but there is no test if some of the definitions like _LARGE_FILES, _LARGEFILE_SOURCE and _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 are needed. Should we add an equivalent test for large files to a common CMake module?

I tested build on Debian 10 (Buster) amd64, i386 and armhf – all successful. There is a question: When building with CMake, there is no equivalent test for large files support. In some CMakeLists.txt we can see hard-coded `_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE=1` – for example [tdelibs/tdeio/CMakeLists.txt](../tdelibs/src/branch/master/tdeio/CMakeLists.txt#L13), but there is no test if some of the definitions like `_LARGE_FILES`, `_LARGEFILE_SOURCE` and `_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64` are needed. Should we add an equivalent test for large files to a common CMake module?
擁有者

Should we add an equivalent test for large files to a common CMake module?

Sounds like a good idea.

```Should we add an equivalent test for large files to a common CMake module?``` Sounds like a good idea.
擁有者

@obache is it ok to merge? or is this PR marked WIP for a reason (e.g. are you planning more work on this)?

BTW, off64_t is also used in other parts of TDE. It could be a good idea to make similar changes to increase portability.

@obache is it ok to merge? or is this PR marked WIP for a reason (e.g. are you planning more work on this)? BTW, off64_t is also used in other parts of TDE. It could be a good idea to make similar changes to increase portability.
obache 已留言 5 年前
發布者
協作者

Adding "WIP" is just following the guide.

Adding "WIP" is just following the guide.
擁有者

We use the WIP label to indicate that the author of PR will still be working on this. If the author thinks, that PR is ready, then will delete the WIP label. That's why it is our question, whether from your perspective PR is still WIP or ready.

We use the WIP label to indicate that the author of PR will still be working on this. If the author thinks, that PR is ready, then will delete the WIP label. That's why it is our question, whether from your perspective PR is still WIP or ready.
obache 已留言 5 年前
發布者
協作者

You can remove WIP label if this PR is acceptable for you.

I don't know whether it is requested to replace _GNU_SOURCE and convert to cmake additionally.

You can remove WIP label if this PR is acceptable for you. I don't know whether it is requested to replace _GNU_SOURCE and convert to cmake additionally.
SlavekB 將標題從 WIP: change large file support to more portable 改為 Change large file support to more portable 5 年前
SlavekB 關閉了這個合併請求 5 年前
SlavekB 刪除分支 feat/portable-large-file-support 5 年前
SlavekB 新增到 R14.0.6 release 里程碑 5 年前
此合併請求已被合併為 12ef306abc
登入 才能加入這對話。
沒有審核者
未選擇里程碑
沒有負責人
4 參與者
通知
截止日期

未設定截止日期。

先決條件

未設定先決條件。

參考: TDE/tdeaccessibility#2
載入中…
尚未有任何內容