From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.122.233] helo=mgw-mx06.nokia.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1JjH3p-0004gQ-BQ for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 08 Apr 2008 16:52:41 +0000 Subject: Re: Question about ubimkvol vs. mkfs.ubifs From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Bruce_Leonard@selinc.com In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 19:51:39 +0300 Message-Id: <1207673499.8040.118.camel@sauron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Reply-To: dedekind@infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 09:45 -0700, Bruce_Leonard@selinc.com wrote: > One would think so, but I keep running into division and modulo problems=20 > (because doing 64-bit division in the kernel is strongly frowned upon, fo= r=20 > good reasons), and once I work through all those issues I get seg faults,= =20 > etc, etc, etc. You know...the usual development things ;). Yeah. It will take time. It's shame MTD still has this limitation. > I'll try and remember to get some exact mount times for you when we get=20 > things a bit more stable. I'd appreciate, thanks. --=20 Best regards, Artem Bityutskiy (=D0=91=D0=B8=D1=82=D1=8E=D1=86=D0=BA=D0=B8=D0=B9 =D0=90= =D1=80=D1=82=D1=91=D0=BC)