[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [MiNT] FreeMiNT 1.18 release

On 12/04/12 12:02, Eero Tamminen wrote:

On tiistai 04 joulukuu 2012, Alan Hourihane wrote:
Why is PATH_MAX not applied to mkdir? I forgot the details, sorry.
  From the changelog, PATH_MAX was being removed in as many places as

But for mkdir, we never need to check the size as we're creating the
filename. Whereas deletion requires the lookup of the inode with
path2cookie which requires PATH_MAX variable.

As realistically, the kernel itself shouldn't impose limits. It's only
the filesystem itself which has the limits.
I can understand why file system would have a filename limit, but
why it would have a path limit?   I think PATH_MAX is just (POSIX)
C-library convention.

E.g. in case of Ext2, according to Wikipedia just the filename can
be 255 chars long:

The way the kernel currently uses PATH_MAX, it is a filename limit, not a path limit.

And that's why I said it should probably be 255, instead of 128 as ext2fs filename limit is 255.