Re: An importanta patch for glibc 2.1.1

[hjl@varesearch.com (H.J. Lu)]

> 
> 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.