On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 09:04:06PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > It is unspecified whether all members of the statvfs structure have
> > meaningful values on all file systems.
>
> In my opinion, the advantage of not reporting bogus pathnames in /proc/mounts
> by far outweighs the problems is sometimes causes for fstatvfs(). Anyone
> relying on the information obtained from statvfs / fstatvfs is making false
> assumptions anyway, and in "normal setups" as you called them, nothing
> changes for fstatvfs and statvfs.
So what about stopping the flaming here and implementing real statvfs/
fstatvfs syscalls instead of these horrible hacks glibc has to do currently?
Using our kstatfs infrastructure that should be dirt simple.
arch/sparc64/solaris/fs.c already has a template of a statvfs syscall for
solaris, although we could probably improve a little on that.
-
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/
[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]
