Re: [patch 1/5] cramfs: small stat(2) fix

2005-03-09 Thread Greg KH
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:16:54PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > From: Eric Lammerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > When I stat(2) a device node on a cramfs, the st_blocks field is bogus > (it's derived from the size field which in this case holds the major/minor > numbers). This makes du(1)

Re: [patch 1/5] cramfs: small stat(2) fix

2005-03-09 Thread Greg KH
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:16:54PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Eric Lammerts [EMAIL PROTECTED] When I stat(2) a device node on a cramfs, the st_blocks field is bogus (it's derived from the size field which in this case holds the major/minor numbers). This makes du(1) output

[patch 1/5] cramfs: small stat(2) fix

2005-03-04 Thread akpm
From: Eric Lammerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> When I stat(2) a device node on a cramfs, the st_blocks field is bogus (it's derived from the size field which in this case holds the major/minor numbers). This makes du(1) output completely wrong. Signed-off-by: Eric Lammerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[patch 1/5] cramfs: small stat(2) fix

2005-03-04 Thread akpm
From: Eric Lammerts [EMAIL PROTECTED] When I stat(2) a device node on a cramfs, the st_blocks field is bogus (it's derived from the size field which in this case holds the major/minor numbers). This makes du(1) output completely wrong. Signed-off-by: Eric Lammerts [EMAIL PROTECTED]