On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > If noone else does, I suppose I can. Thanks. > > (> .. gets ENOENT .. > and that is not because it only is a partial image?) I don't think so, but I obviously have no way of actually confirming my suspicion. If the stat information was wrong due to the partial image, the lookup should still have succeeded (the directory entries certainly were there - otherwise they'd not have shown up in readdir), and we would just have gotten garbage inode information etc. I think. Linus - 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/
- BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Harald Koenig
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Andries Brouwer
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Andries . Brouwer
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Andries . Brouwer
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Harald Koenig
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Andries . Brouwer
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Harald Koenig
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Harald Koenig
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4... Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and... Harald Koenig
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4... Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Harald Koenig