[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) wrote: > Jim Meyering wrote: >> I don't think coreutils should try to work around this kernel/fs bug. >> Do you know if this is fixed in later 2.4.x releases? I sure hope so. > > I really doubt it. AFAIK the linux kernel folks don't really claim > support for ia64 on the 2.4 kernel. It just barely worked there. I > remember having a lot of issues with it. The linux 2.6 series was > where the work went in to make it stable. Red Hat however backported > a lot of ia64 patches into their 2.4 stream so as to release it to > their customers. > > I agree that this is not really something that coreutils can work > around in the code. The kernel really is misbehaving. The best that > might be hoped for would be to recognize the kernel and platform and > skip the test. But leaving this as a failure would be a good nag for > people to upgrade because the kernel really does have this problem.
Yes, but the code that decides whether to skip the test should know whether there is a version of linux-2.4.x for which the bug is fixed. I guess you don't have access to an ia64 system with 2.4.X, 20 <= X ? _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
