From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Oct 29 11:20:24 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E879A16A403
	for <freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 29 Oct 2006 11:20:24 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7D4143D45
	for <freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 29 Oct 2006 11:20:24 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k9TBKOJv057365
	for <freebsd-bugs@freefall.freebsd.org>; Sun, 29 Oct 2006 11:20:24 GMT
	(envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org)
Received: (from gnats@localhost)
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k9TBKOaL057364;
	Sun, 29 Oct 2006 11:20:24 GMT (envelope-from gnats)
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 11:20:24 GMT
Message-Id: <200610291120.k9TBKOaL057364@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
From: Yar Tikhiy <yar@comp.chem.msu.su>
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/104458: fts(3) can't handle very deep trees
X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Yar Tikhiy <yar@comp.chem.msu.su>
List-Id: Bug reports <freebsd-bugs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-bugs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-bugs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-bugs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 11:20:25 -0000

The following reply was made to PR bin/104458; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Yar Tikhiy <yar@comp.chem.msu.su>
To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: bin/104458: fts(3) can't handle very deep trees
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 14:13:48 +0300

 JFTR:
 
 NetBSD has the fts_*pathlen fields in FTSENT extended to u_int.
 But why not to size_t?
 
 NetBSD's fts_level is still short though.  If we extend ours, it
 should be int64_t as we don't want to hit INT_MAX right after SHRT_MAX.
 
 BTW, FTW.level is int now, as is FTW.base.  The former should be
 the same as FTS.fts_level while the latter begs to be size_t as
 it's an array index.  SUSv3 defines them as int though.
 
 In addition, NetBSD folks've made fts_number 64-bit.  Perhaps we
 could just make our fts_bignum and fts_number the same field if can
 take the ABI breakage.
 
 Other candidates for extension to size_t are fts_pathlen and
 fts_nitems in FTS as they both are essentially array indexes.
 
 Lastly, the flag fields in FTS could be extended, too, because one
 of them, fts_info, has 15 bits used now.
 
 After changing fts.h, fts.c should be made 64-bit clear.
 
 -- 
 Yar