Florian Weimer (fwei...@redhat.com) said: > On 02/18/2013 10:33 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > >XFS recently defaulted to allowing > 32 bit inode numbers, and btrfs can let > >inode numbers creep past 2^32 as well. > > > >While most applications don't care one bit about st_ino returned from a > >stat() call, the sad fact is that you'll get EOVERFLOW from stat32 if the > >inode number is too big to fit in 32 bits, even if you just wanted to get > >the file size. > > > >I have a script (http://sandeen.net/misc/summarise_stat.pl) which Greg Banks > >wrote; it can check a path or list of filenames for binaries which contain > >non-64bit-safe stat calls. A quick look over my F18 install finds the > >situation to be only slightly in favor of executables using 64-bit variants: > > I ran a search for '__xstat', '__lxstat', '__fxstat' against current > Fedora 18 (using https://github.com/fweimer/symboldb/) and found the > attached list of packages. > > There are 2179 packages which reference the 32-bit interfaces, 1375 > which reference the 64-bit interfaces, and 186 packages reference > both. > > If we add -DFILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 to the default CFLAGS, this comes > pretty close to an ABI bump. But considering the numbers, I wonder > if it's the right thing to do if we need to cope with 64-bit inode > numbers.
It's kind of a shame we just did the mass rebuild, if we're going to have to do part of it again if we change this. Or we could just stop building 32-bit support. Bill -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
