Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:41:37 +0100
From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: bug in statfs
Message-ID: <20031204094137.GT1640@cygbert.vinschen.de>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <uoeuprfyq DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <uoeuprfyq.fsf@gnu.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 12:03:41PM -0500, Sam Steingold wrote:
> Hi,
> POSIX specifies struct statfs to contain slots f_frsize, f_flag,
> f_favail, and f_namemax and to be declared in <sys/statvfs.h>:
> <http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/basedefs/sys/statvfs.h.html>
> 
> Cygwin defines struct statfs without slots f_frsize, f_flag, and
> f_favail, and with f_namelen instead of f_namemax, in sys/vfs.h (also
> included from sys/statfs.h) and does not come with sys/statvfs.h.

Sure.  It's struct *statfs*, not struct *statvfs*.  We also have a
statfs system call, not statvfs.  So you're talking about adding a
new system call.

> Any change this might get rectified in the nearest future?

Any important information you can't get from statfs?  Otherwise it's
a matter of time and interest, as usual.

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/