[Quilt-dev] Re: ftw removed; emacs mode; translations; ready for 0.43?

[Jean Delvare]

On 2006-01-26, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > However, I think it would be even better to rely on PATH_MAX + 1 for the
> > allocation of p (or 4096 where PATH_MAX is not defined) and only
> > allocate it once for a given directory. We can then use snprintf instead
> > of sprintf and check the return value to detect errors. On error, we can
> > realloc with the needed size, or just fail - I really don't see anyone
> > using such long names, and as I understand it PATH_MAX is a system limit
> > so it probably wouldn't work anyway.
>
> Yes, a PATH_MAX long string would work as well. Do you want to fix it?

Will do. Is it OK if I do it this evening, or do you want me to wait
until after the release?

--
Jean Delvare