Date:	Thu, 29 Nov 2001 10:05:14 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: RESEND: Patch to computer st_blksize in struct stat
In-Reply-To:	<3C05577B.590A4890@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1011129100435.10998B-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 Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Richard Dawe wrote:

> > > I chose 32K, because that's what I found on my system.
> > 
> > How did you find that?  What methods of reporting the block size of a
> > remote drive did you use?
> 
> statfs() returned 32K on my network drives. Is this not reliable on
> network drives?

I think it isn't.  And your example:

> It may not be relevant, but I mapped a share from my Linux box, which is
> running kernel 2.2.19 with Samba 2.0.10. The block size on the ext2
> partition containing the share is 4K.

...just proved I was right ;-)

- Raw text -