On Sat, Apr 21, 2007 at 09:04:06PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > > It is unspecified whether all members of the statvfs structure have > > meaningful values on all file systems. > > In my opinion, the advantage of not reporting bogus pathnames in /proc/mounts > by far outweighs the problems is sometimes causes for fstatvfs(). Anyone > relying on the information obtained from statvfs / fstatvfs is making false > assumptions anyway, and in "normal setups" as you called them, nothing > changes for fstatvfs and statvfs. So what about stopping the flaming here and implementing real statvfs/ fstatvfs syscalls instead of these horrible hacks glibc has to do currently? Using our kstatfs infrastructure that should be dirt simple. arch/sparc64/solaris/fs.c already has a template of a statvfs syscall for solaris, although we could probably improve a little on that. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
