This is the mail archive of the
libc-hacker@cygnus.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: An importanta patch for glibc 2.1.1
- To: schwab@issan.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (Andreas Schwab)
- Subject: Re: An importanta patch for glibc 2.1.1
- From: hjl@varesearch.com (H.J. Lu)
- Date: Thu, 8 Apr 1999 08:49:53 -0700 (PDT)
- Cc: libc-hacker@cygnus.com, gafton@redhat.com
>
> hjl@varesearch.com (H.J. Lu) writes:
>
> |> We need this patch for glibc 2.1.1.
>
> IMHO this patch is more appriopriate. According to SunOS4 the f_bsize
^^^^^^^
Can we drop SunOS4 now?
> member of struct statfs is the "fundamental file system block size" which
> corresponds directly to f_frsize from statvfs. Any comments?
>
It is not what Solaris 7/SunOS5 says. It has:
u_long f_bsize; /* preferred file system block size */
u_long f_frsize; /* fundamental filesystem block
(size if supported) */
fsblkcnt_t f_blocks; /* total # of blocks on file system
in units of f_frsize */
It is the similar to The Single UNIX (R) Specification, Version 2:
unsigned long f_bsize file system block size
unsigned long f_frsize fundamental filesystem block size
fsblkcnt_t f_blocks total number of blocks on file system in
units of f_frsize
Why do we have to follow SunOS4?
>
> Thu Apr 8 14:29:14 1999 Andreas Schwab <schwab@issan.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
>
> * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/fstatvfs.c (fstatvfs): Set f_frsize, not
> f_bsize, in struct statvfs from f_bsize in struct statfs.
>
So my vote is NO.
H.J.