"Richard L. Hamilton" <rlha...@smart.net> wrote:
> I did find the earlier discussion on the subject (someone e-mailed me that
> there had been
> such). It seemed to conclude that some apps are statically linked with old
> scandir() code
> that (incorrectly) assumed that the number of directory entries could be
> estimated as
> st_size/24; and worse, that some such apps might be seeing the small st_size
> that zfs
> offers via NFS, so they might not even be something that could be fixed on
> Solaris at all.
> But I didn't see anything in the discussion that suggested that this was
> going to be changed.
> Nor did I see a compelling argument for leaving it the way it is, either. In
> the face of
> "undefined", all arguments end up as pragmatism rather than principle, IMO.
This is a problem I had to fix for some customers in 1992 when people started
to use NFS
servers based on the Novell OS.
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
