Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 19 Jan 2015 07:44:26 -0800 (PST)
From:      Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bris.ac.uk>
To:        mexas@bris.ac.uk, rmacklem@uoguelph.ca
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: old bug: mount_nfs path/name is limited to 88 chars
Message-ID:  <201501191544.t0JFiP7O027952@mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <1401700998.16283447.1421681564732.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From rmacklem@uoguelph.ca Mon Jan 19 15:37:25 2015
>> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=167105
>> 
>> is a show stopper for me. The path/name length is
>> beyond my control, so I cannot make it shorter.
>> 
>> This discussion seems inconclusive:
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2012-April/038543.html
>> 
>> Is there no easy solution to this PR?
>> Or is there no interest in fixing the issue?
>> 
>Well, the "easy" solution is to just increase the value
>of NNAMELEN and rebuild everything from sources to use
>the modified sys/mount.h. (If you can run a modified
>system built entirely from sources, I think you can do
>this.)

I can do this on several 10.1-stable systems, but I understood
from the email trail that there is no guarantee that nothing
will be broken by such change. I know there is never a guarantee,
but..

>However, this can't be done in -current because it breaks
>the statfs(2) syscall API, etc.

Even on 10.1-stable I see in statfs(2):

     #define MNAMELEN        88              /* size of on/from name bufs */

So perhaps changing MNAMELEN will break statfs(2) on
-stable too?

Anton



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201501191544.t0JFiP7O027952>