On 01 Nov 2014 13:00, Jan Chaloupka wrote: > On 11/01/2014 04:56 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On 31 Oct 2014 22:26, Jan Chaloupka wrote: > >> there is probably a wrong number in description of statfs structure. In > >> description section, struct statfs contains as a last field f_spare[5]. > >> But the /usr/include/bits/statfs.h itself contains f_spare[4] > >> (glibc-headers-2.18 on f20). > >> > >> Looking into glibc-2.20, there is f_spare[6]. Looks like the structure > >> is gradually evolving :). > >> > >> Inspecting upstream history (gitk statfs.h), it shows it was f_spare[6] > >> since 1997. > > i wonder if we should strip f_spare from the man page. it's not really useful. > > I would prefer to keep f_spare. why ? it serves no useful purpose, and people should be including the header to get the definition. the man page is there to describe the fields that actually get used. > As Siddhesh wrote, statfs.h is architecture/OS dependent in general. In > a case of fedora (f20, f22) armv7hl, x86_64 and i686 has f_spare[4]. > > We could add a sentence right under struct statfs: > "Depending on your architecture or OS, length of f_spare of statfs > struct can vary." this man page is Linux specific > > the __SWORD_TYPE should probably be replaced with __fsword_t, and drop the > > __WORDSIZE logic. that gets ugly with syscall ABIs. > > I am not sure if __SWORD_TYPE is no longer valid type and is replace > by __fsword_t everywhere (all architectures and OS). the latest headers use __fsword_t -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
