Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2023 12:44:23 -0700
From: Paul Eggert <>
To:, Jonathan Wakely <>
Cc: Rich Felker <>,,,
Subject: Re: Re: regression in man pages for interfaces using

On 2023-06-30 01:02, Jonathan Wakely wrote:

> For APIs like copy_file_range(2) and splice(2) the arguments are loff_t* so
> you can't just "pass arguments that fit in off_t" to them.

Sorry, I missed that detail. Still, the argument stands. On legacy 
32-bit platforms without -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, calls will still work 
if they pass null pointers to copy_file_range, a common case in my 
experience. The calls that don't, will get typecheck errors or warnings, 
and that's good enough to address the issue.

> And in C++ it won't even compile unless you get the pointer
> types exactly right (C compilers will typically allow the mismatch with
> just a warning).

That's good! People should be using -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 if they use 
these functions, and the typecheck errors and/or warnings will remind 
them. The man pages don't need to (and shouldn't) document what happens 
if you call these functions on legacy 32-bit platforms without first 
defining _FILE_OFFSET_BITS to be 64.

> People miss footnotes.

OK, let's make the point more prominently, at the start of the man page. 
Proposed patch attached. This patch should work for musl as well as for 
View attachment "0001-off64_t-prefer-off_t-for-splice-etc.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (8355 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.