On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 09:19:44AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> On 12 December 2012 09:14, Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Looks like that would be print out of fs_table_initialise_projects.
> >
> > 40 static int
> > 41 fs_device_number(
> > 42 const char *name,
> > 43 dev_t *devnum)
> > 44 {
> > 45 struct stat64 sbuf;
> > 46
> > 47 if (stat64(name, &sbuf) < 0)
> > 48 return errno;
> > ^^^^^^^^ here?
> >
>
> Yes, I found the same (IIRC) code. However, strace clearly shows the result
> of stat64 is 0, and the above is for values less then 0, so this shouldn't
> happen...
D'oh. I guess that fs_cursor_next_entry is the next candidate:
355 /*
356 * Given a directory, match it up to a filesystem mount point.
357 */
358 static struct fs_path *
359 fs_mount_point_from_path(
360 const char *dir)
361 {
362 fs_cursor_t cursor;
363 fs_path_t *fs;
364 dev_t dev = 0;
365
366 if (fs_device_number(dir, &dev))
367 return NULL;
368
369 fs_cursor_initialise(NULL, FS_MOUNT_POINT, &cursor);
370 while ((fs = fs_cursor_next_entry(&cursor))) {
371 if (fs->fs_datadev == dev)
372 break;
373 }
374 return fs;
375 }
Hmm. There are some recent commits that look related. Commit 36298cced and
19473a2ac. Can you try with this code?
git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfsprogs.git
> > Do you have a wonky /etc/projects file or something?
> >
>
> Not AFAIK. Has the format or parsing changed?
>
> hq ~ # cat /etc/projects
> 3:/share/systems
> 4:/share/cs
> 5:/share/cas
> 5:/share/cfcp
> 6:/share/lgs
> #7:/share/csd
> 8:/share/common
> 9:/share/summer
Nope. Looks ok to me.
Regards,
Ben
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
