Date:	Mon, 8 Jan 2001 09:00:42 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	"Peter J. Farley III" <pjfarley AT banet DOT net>
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>,
	ceo AT nbensacomputers DOT com
Subject:	Re: Fw: Patch for statfs.c
In-Reply-To:	<5.0.2.1.0.20010107121357.00aa6580@pop5.banet.net>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1010108085114.4690F-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Sun, 7 Jan 2001, Peter J. Farley III wrote:

> Note that the rebuilt df reports too many 1024 blocks, 326552*1024 = 
> 334389248 while 325888*1024 = 333709312.  The difference is 664 blocks, 
> which I cannot explain easily.

Since two versions of statfs which are supposed to be identical return 
different values, I think the only way to find out why is to step inside 
both versions with a debugger and see where does the difference come 
from.  Perhaps there's some bug in how the transfer buffer is layed out 
when passing requests to the CDROM driver vie Int 2Fh.

> Filesystem         1024-blocks  Used Available Capacity Mounted on
> EXCALIBUR_16X9_FF_NA 6729942 6729942        0    100%   y:/
[snip]
>           0 file(s)              0 bytes
>           1 dir(s)            0.00 MB free
>                           6,572.21 MB total disk space, 100% in use

Please make a point of showing the numbers in the same units.  It is very 
annoying to grab a calculator or invoke Calc each time to compare the 
reported sizes.

According to my calculations, 6,572.21 MB is exactly 6729943 bytes, so 
these two numbers are consistent.  Is that what you wanted to say?

- Raw text -