On Monday 12 August 2002 11:30 am, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> The problem is not just a system-level one, but a filesystem-level
> one. Enabling 64 bits by default might be dangerous, because a DBA
> might think "oh, it supports largefiles by default" and therefore not
> notice that the filesystem itself is not mounted with largefile
> support. But I suspect that the developers would welcome autoconfig
> patches if someone offered them.
Interesting point. Before I could deploy RPMs with largefile support by
default, I would have to make sure it wouldn't silently break anything. So
keep discussing the issues involved, and I'll see what comes of it. I don't
have an direct experience with the largefile support, and am learning as I go
with this.
Given that I have to make the source RPM's buildable on distributions that
might not have the largefile support available, so on those distributions the
support will have to be unavailable -- and the decision to build it or not to
build it must be automatable.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11
