No, V3 is in use since long time - a lot before 2.4.24 surely.
Then there's another (minor) bug in uml_moo :-)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /export/virtual/usermode/machine.test $ ./uml_moo
...
./uml_moo supports version 1 and 2 COW files.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /export/virtual/usermode/machine.test $
Is this a division by zero thingie?
#define DIV_ROUND(x, len) (((x) + (len) - 1) / (len))
#define ROUND_UP(x, align) DIV_ROUND(x, align) * (align)
so you have DIV_ROUND(x, 0), which creates a division by 0.
Now, the problem is: why that damn bad thing has a 0 alignment? And the
question is: did you create the COW file with a 64-bit machine? In that case,
it's a kind of bug, otherwise it's a different story.
Also, it could matter whether you where using a <=2.6.12 / 2.6.13.4-bs4 or a
different kernel to create the COW file (due to an unwanted format change).
This cow file was created on my amd64 host minutes before running the
test. It was created with 2.6.13.4-bs4.
There was no problem whatsoever with COW files before I tried to use
uml_moo. ie, they work as expected when running them. That's why I thought
the bug was with uml_moo rather than with cow files as such.
I could always re-do the first steps of the test and zip the cow file if
you want to take a look at it.
Otherwise I think I'll simply not use COW files for now. Things work
satisfyingly well without them. :-)
// Joel
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-user mailing list
User-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-user
