Hi, On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 05:59:09PM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > Long long things, even it they work well, are not very nice on 32 bit > machines. For the time being, I'd advise increasing cluster size rather > than using 64 bit values. Doesn't help, because we're talking about numbers which are used deep in the guts of the block device code. At that level, we are counting in sectors, whose size is determined by the disk and which we can't arbitrarily redefine to suit our own needs. Cheers, Stephen - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: Large File support and bl... Richard Henderson
- Re: Large File support and bl... Matthew Jacob
- Re: Large File support and bl... Michael Meissner
- Re: Large File support and bl... Matthew Jacob
- Re: Large File support and bl... Michael Meissner
- Re: Large File support and bl... Matthew Jacob
- Re: Large File support and bl... Richard Henderson
- RE: Large File support and blocks. Richard B. Johnson
- RE: Large File support and blocks. Linda Walsh
- RE: Large File support and blocks... Mark Hahn
- 512 byte magic multiplier (was: Large ... Stephen C. Tweedie
- 512 byte magic multiplier (was: Large File support and ... Daniel Phillips
- Re: 512 byte magic multiplier (was: Large File sup... Alan Cox
- Re: 512 byte magic multiplier (was: Large File sup... Alexander Viro
- Re: 512 byte magic multiplier (was: Large File... Daniel Phillips
- Re: 512 byte magic multiplier (was: Large ... Theodore Y. Ts'o