[lug] File size limit issue
andersk at uswest.net
Sun Nov 19 17:46:07 MST 2000
Well, a quick look at samba's configure script shows that for 64 bit
aware systems -- solaris, etc. -- it sets LFS on. By default when
seeing that 'uname' is Linux, samba disables LFS, which makes
sense since stock kernels are not LFS ready.
Time to do some more homework. I think I can get LFS up and
working with samba, on Linux. :)
thanks for the input.
On 19 Nov 2000, at 23:25, Aaron Crane wrote:
> "Anders Knudsen" <andersk at uswest.net> writes:
> > From other info I found hunting this weekend, ext2 does support LFS.
> That's good to hear (though I note that this does not apply for stock 2.2.x
> > I may try recompiling dd or samba to see if I can get it to do larger
> > files. From http://www.scyld.com/software/lfs.html it looks like if I use
> > _FILE_OFFSET_BITS 64 that would do the trick.
> If the code was well written, it's possible that compiling with
> _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 will magically turn it into an LFS-aware program.
> However, verifying that ought to involve a full audit of the code, which
> might be somewhat time-consuming. I've never looked at the code for either
> dd or Samba, so I can't say how much work would be involved.
> One other issue: you can't portably use printf or scanf functions on off64_t
> values (or, equivalently, on off_t values in programs compiled with
> _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64). (You can mostly rely on constructs like "%lld", but
> this hasn't quite been standardised yet.) This may or may not be a problem
> for the programs in question.
> Aaron Crane <aaron.crane at pobox.com> <URL:http://pobox.com/~aaronc/>
> Web Page: http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
More information about the LUG