Acked-By: Kirill Korotaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
hit it today as well :/
> When a 32-bit program that was not compiled with large file offsets does a
> stat and gets a st_ino value back that won't fit in the 32 bit field, glibc
> (correctly) generates an EOVERFLOW error. We can't do anything about f
When a 32-bit program that was not compiled with large file offsets does a
stat and gets a st_ino value back that won't fit in the 32 bit field, glibc
(correctly) generates an EOVERFLOW error. We can't do anything about fs's
with larger permanent inode numbers, but when we generate them on the fly,
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 03:47:07PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> When a 32-bit program that was not compiled with large file offsets does a
> stat and gets a st_ino value back that won't fit in the 32 bit field, glibc
> (correctly) generates an EOVERFLOW error. We can't do anything about fs's
> with
When a 32-bit program that was not compiled with large file offsets does a
stat and gets a st_ino value back that won't fit in the 32 bit field, glibc
(correctly) generates an EOVERFLOW error. We can't do anything about fs's
with larger permanent inode numbers, but when we generate them on the fly,
When a 32-bit program that was not compiled with large file offsets does a
stat and gets a st_ino value back that won't fit in the 32 bit field, glibc
(correctly) generates an EOVERFLOW error. We can't do anything about fs's
with larger permanent inode numbers, but when we generate them on the fly,
5 matches
Mail list logo
