On Fri, Nov 04, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>
> Your patch is not a solution, since readdir will remain nonconforming.
> It is basically a workaround for a bug in glibc.
Updating the glibc is no solution because this isn't possible here. And I still
have the opinion that it is the filesystems job to remember the right
offset. At least this is what SuSV3 is telling me.
> It makes readdir
> nonconforming in a different way, but the end result in not
> necessarily better.
Hmm, yes you are right.
>
> If you manage to make dcache_readdir conform to SUS without overly
> bloating the implementation, that's fine.
Will look into that, if its possible.
Regards,
Jan Blunck
--
Jan Blunck [email protected]
SuSE LINUX AG - A Novell company
Maxfeldstr. 5 +49-911-74053-608
D-90409 Nürnberg http://www.suse.de
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Re: [RFC,PATCH] libfs dcache_readdir() and dcache_dir_lseek() bugfix
- Re: [RFC,PATCH] libfs dcache_readdir() and dcache_dir_lseek() bugfix
- Re: [RFC,PATCH] libfs dcache_readdir() and dcache_dir_lseek() bugfix
- Re: [RFC,PATCH] libfs dcache_readdir() and dcache_dir_lseek() bugfix
- Re: [RFC,PATCH] libfs dcache_readdir() and dcache_dir_lseek() bugfix
- Re: [RFC,PATCH] libfs dcache_readdir() and dcache_dir_lseek() bugfix
- Re: [RFC,PATCH] libfs dcache_readdir() and dcache_dir_lseek() bugfix
- Re: [RFC,PATCH] libfs dcache_readdir() and dcache_dir_lseek() bugfix
- Re: [RFC,PATCH] libfs dcache_readdir() and dcache_dir_lseek() bugfix
- Re: [RFC,PATCH] libfs dcache_readdir() and dcache_dir_lseek() bugfix
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]