Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 07:55:38 +1000
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com>
To: jtrostel@snapserver.com
Cc: acl-devel@bestbits.at, Andreas Gruenbacher <ag@bestbits.at>,
   XFS list <linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com>,
   Timothy Shimmin <tes@boing.melbourne.sgi.com>,
   Marc Kaplan <mkaplan@snapserver.com>,
   "Burrows, Dan" <dburrows@snapserver.com>
Subject: Re: Difficulties with large ACL/DACL counts
Message-ID: <20020504075538.T100154@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com>
References: <XFMail.20020503174123.jtrostel@snapserver.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20020503174123.jtrostel@snapserver.com>; from jtrostel@snapserver.com on Fri, May 03, 2002 at 05:41:23PM -0400
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
Precedence: bulk

hi John,

Tim and I came across this during the week -- we believe it to
be a problem in our XFS code, returning E2BIG instead of ERANGE
in some places where the user tools are expecting ERANGE (which
we documented in the man pages when doing the unified syscalls).
Ultimately, this prevents the tools from re-doing the request
with a larger buffer, and we get an error instead of a retry.

Should be fixed early next week, along with Ethan's other errno
related problem (EPERM vs EACCESS), though I haven't had a chance
to look into that in detail.

cheers.

-- 
Nathan