Re: Then there's PATH_MAX

Liste des GroupesRevenir à col advocacy 
Sujet : Re: Then there's PATH_MAX
De : OFeem1987 (at) *nospam* teleworm.us (Chris Ahlstrom)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date : 10. Dec 2024, 13:10:51
Autres entêtes
Organisation : None
Message-ID : <vj9b4b$uj09$6@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3
User-Agent : slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 22:42:48 -0500, DFS wrote:
>
Surely you know NTFS supports file paths up to 32,767 characters?
>
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>
<https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14500893/is-the-255-char-limit-for-filenames-on-windows-and-unix-the-whole-path-or-part>

That's about 11 years old; have Windows applications basically caught up?

--
 > I'm an idiot..  At least this [bug] took about 5 minutes to find..
 Disquieting ...
-- Gonzalo Tornaria in response to Linus Torvalds's

Date Sujet#  Auteur
9 Dec 24 * Then there's PATH_MAX13vallor
9 Dec 24 +- Re: Then there's PATH_MAX1Chris Ahlstrom
10 Dec 24 +* Re: Then there's PATH_MAX5DFS
10 Dec 24 i`* Re: Then there's PATH_MAX4Lawrence D'Oliveiro
10 Dec 24 i +- Re: Then there's PATH_MAX1vallor
10 Dec 24 i +- Re: Then there's PATH_MAX1Chris Ahlstrom
11 Dec 24 i `- Re: Then there's PATH_MAX1DFS
10 Dec 24 `* Re: Then there's PATH_MAX6Farley Flud
10 Dec 24  +- Re: Then there's PATH_MAX1Chris Ahlstrom
10 Dec 24  `* Fine, let's see you using pathconf(3) on Windows (was: Re: Then there's PATH_MAX)4vallor
10 Dec 24   `* Re: Fine, let's see you using pathconf(3) on Windows (was: Re: Then there's PATH_MAX)3Farley Flud
10 Dec 24    `* Re: Fine, let's see you using pathconf(3) on Windows (was: Re: Then there's PATH_MAX)2vallor
11 Dec 24     `- Re: Fine, let's see you using pathconf(3) on Windows (was: Re: Then there's PATH_MAX)1vallor

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal