Mail Archives: cygwin/2010/12/12/12:28:28
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 01:12:08PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>On Dec 10 10:38, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 12/10/2010 10:21 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> > On Dec 10 17:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> >> On Dec 10 11:20, Elford,Andrew [Ontario] wrote:
>> >>> $ df -T /cygdrive/f/file
>> >>> Filesystem Type 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
>> >>> C: ntfs 83886076 31717608 52168468 38% /cygdrive/c
>> >>> F: ntfs 11717703676 72036296 -5534201804 - /cygdrive/f
>> >>> L: ntfs 6143999996 883063196 5260936800 15% /cygdrive/l
>> >> [...]
>> >> Hmm. OTOH, seeing the size of your FS, I'm also wondering if we should
>> >> make the algorithm a bit more foolproof for the future by manipulating
>> >> the value of f_frsize if the TotalAllocationUnits returned by Windows
>> >> is > sizeof (fsblkcnt_t).
>> >
>> > No, scratch that. It wouldn't work well. I guess what we really need
>> > is to redefine fsblkcnt_t to become a 64 bit type. Oh well, this
>> > requires another backward compatibility hack, just like back when we
>> > switched to 64 bit off_t (Cygwin 1.5).
>>
>> Let's do it at the same time as we change sigset_t and time_t to 64-bits
>> (with knock-on effects to struct stat, among others). In other words,
>> all good changes, but certainly something that will take a lot of
>> planning to pull off in one go.
>
>It's not only planning it's also the good old, but hopelessly underrated
>http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#SHTDI problem. And we should not do it
>unless we see a point at which Cygwin 1.7.x is really stable enough to
>stay unchanged for a while, so we can mess up CVS HEAD. Oh, and, I
>would really appreciate if we could do it in a collaborative effort.
>Patches are more telling than thousand words.
Why does sigset_t have to be 64-bits? Real-time signals?
cgf
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
- Raw text -