From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HY4lE-0001uh-5Z
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Apr 2007 14:26:40 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HY4lA-0001lb-8C
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Apr 2007 14:26:39 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HY4l9-0001lJ-Vj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Apr 2007 14:26:36 -0400
Received: from phoenix.bawue.net ([193.7.176.60] helo=mail.bawue.net)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <ths@networkno.de>) id 1HY4iC-0007qM-PX
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 01 Apr 2007 14:23:33 -0400
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 19:18:45 +0100
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Tiny compliance bug in `block-vvfat.c'
Message-ID: <20070401181845.GA29135@networkno.de>
References: <20070328213016.GA28328@fencepost.gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20070328213016.GA28328@fencepost.gnu.org>
From: Thiemo Seufer <ths@networkno.de>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Thomas Schwinge <tschwinge@gnu.org>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, johannes.schindelin@gmx.de

Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> [I'm not subscribed to the mailing list, so please keep me cced.]
> 
> 
> Hello!
> 
> We kept wondering why the GNU/Hurd's `fatfs' translator (think Unix
> kernel file system driver) didn't want to ``eat'' the QEMU vvfat
> on-the-fly served floppy images (created from a directory structure using
> ``-fdb fat:floppy:some/where'') until we finally traced it down to a tiny
> QEMU bug in the said vvfat code -- see the following patch.  That
> translator kept telling us that it had expected the file system image to
> be as twice as big as it actually was.
> 
> Handling such images was no problem for GNU GRUB and the Linux kernel,
> but it seems that the GNU/Hurd's fat file system implementation is more
> obeying to standards.  (Now, is that good or bad?  ;-)

It's bad AFAICS. 36 sectors is the right value for a 2.88 MB floppy.


Thiemo