xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: linux 2.4.2-XFS

To: kris buggenhout <kris.buggenhout@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: linux 2.4.2-XFS
From: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:35:10 -0500
Cc: "linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: Message from kris buggenhout <kris.buggenhout@skynet.be> of "Tue, 22 May 2001 23:22:46 +0200." <3B0AD8A6.67AD18DE@skynet.be>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> jansen wrote:
> 
> > Russell Cattelan wrote:
> >
> > [stuff deleted]
> >
> > > The pending release of XFS 1.0.1 will be RH7.1 and 2.4.4 based, and will
> > > be based primarily on what is in the development tree... once the list
> > > or problems has been whittled down.
> >
> > [stuff deleted]
> >
> > I realize that you all have a great many other things to do and fixing
> > non-XFS related kernel bugs is not your focus but having said that
> > I'd really like to see the patch for the IRIX -> Linux NFS directory bug
> > (where files are missing when doing an "ls *" in a directory served via
> > NFS from an IRIX server) be included in the next XFS release.  I believe
> > this was mentioned on the list about three weeks ago.  There is a patch
> > that appears to fix this in the 1.0 release (with a little modification
> > since the patch is for stock 2.4.2).  I believe there was also a patch
> > for 2.4.4 but I haven't had the time to try it.
> >
> > This bug initially stopped me from installing the 1.0 release on all
> > my Linux machines because we have a fair number of IRIX machines
> > serving files via NFS and this bug caused a whole host of problems.
> >
> > The patches for this bug can be found at:
> >
> >
> 
> wasnt there a workaround ... by exporting the fs on the irix machine with -o
> 32bitclients option ?
> 
> I remember I had to do this to be able to mount irix nfs shares on linux'en
> and Solaris 2.5 machines.
> without strange problems like not seeing all files in an ls on the nfs
> client.
> 
> I had to do this because our main file server was an Origin200 ... :)
> 
> could be a temp solution to not hold back on xfs ...   ;)

Well, 32 bits is not quite low enough, glibc only likes 31 bits in the
lseek offset, this is the problem. I talked to the glibc maintainer and
he will not budge on this one.  Yes we could package the patch if we do
a respin.

Steve



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>