[GRASS5] raster filename length problem

[Glynn Clements]

Hamish wrote:

> > > More generally, it would help if we had standardised NAME_MAX and
> > > MAPSET_MAX constants, rather than having arbitrary integer literals
> > > scattered all over the code.
> > 
> > I'll try whenever I come across NAME/MAPSET definitions to set them
> > to NAME_MAX,MAPSET_MAX. Before adding those to gis.h, how long?
> > Is 100 ok during the migration to NAME_MAX,MAPSET_MAX? I'm not
> > sure how to capture string overflows.
> 
> 
> >From memory- Mac OS9 was 40 chars, OSX is unix so fs dependent?; K3B
> reports Joliet FS is 103 chars, something is 31 chars, some are 37
> (maybe that was where I was getting 40 from for OS9).
> 
> So should NAME_MAX,MAPSET_MAX be 128 to not be the limiting factor in
> all (reasonable) cases?  At least bigger than Joliet?
> 
> Does this affect a large MAX_FILES setting much or is it too small a
> component to matter?

With MAX_FILES=256, 256 chars for a map name equates to 64KB; libgis'
BSS segment is currently 248KB, of which G__ accounts for 150KB, of
which 12KB is the name fields in the Reclass structures.

-- 
Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com>