From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 10:54:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 10:53:57 -0500 Received: from a203-167-249-89.reverse.clear.net.nz ([203.167.249.89]:26628 "HELO metastasis.f00f.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 10:53:50 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 04:53:46 +1300 From: Chris Wedgwood To: Alan Cox Cc: Alexander Viro , Stefan Traby , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: ramfs problem... (unlink of sparse file in "D" state) Message-ID: <20010107045346.B696@metastasis.f00f.org> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk on Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 03:35:32PM +0000 X-No-Archive: Yes Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 03:35:32PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: BTW Al: We have another general vfs/fs problem to handle - which is exceeding max file sizes on limited file systems. Pretty much nobody is getting it right. Ext2 can be tricked to go past the limit, sys5 1k sits there emitting printk messages etc. Which filesystems have limits other than 2^31 bytes? I ask this because I was looking at LFS compliance and the way we currently do things now isn't very smart. Only ext2 checks of O_LARGEFILE at present (well, their is perhaps good reason for this as it is one of the fre that supports multiGB files) whereas I think this check should be done in the VFS. --cw - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/