|
| cc:
|
| Subject: RE: [Owfs-developers] OWFS and FUSE Debugging with UML
(UserMode Linux) |
>-|
On Tu
On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 09:31 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What is the expected value of st_nlink - should it include the number of
> dirs in sub-dirs as well.
> That doesn't sound right to me.
>
yes... It should be like that. Temp-sensor 10.xx/. should have
st_nlink=2 since there are
|
| To: owfs-developers
|
| cc:
|
| Subject: RE: [Owfs-developers] OWFS and FU
I have made some more tests with calculating the st_nlink in FS_fstat().
If you define CALC_NLINK in ow_fstat.c it will look somewhat better,
but it's harder to calculate number of dirs in all devices, and in
sub-directories.
Root directory with entries are almost working.
Device 02.* has two su
try to hold all the "aggregate" data. This would also
> help eliminate a subtle potential race condition when the directory times out
> while being listed.
>
> Paul
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
&g
being listed.
Paul
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Christian Magnusson
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 11:21 AM
To: owfs-developers
Subject: RE: [Owfs-developers] OWFS and FUSE Debugging with UML
(UserMode Linux)
I was trying to fix it this afterno
