From owner-freebsd-arch Mon Mar 11 23:16: 8 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA2AB37B405; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 23:16:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g2C7Fenp060374; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 08:15:40 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Garance A Drosihn Cc: Terry Lambert , Harti Brandt , Robert Watson , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Increasing the size of dev_t and ino_t In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 11 Mar 2002 21:58:37 EST." Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 08:15:40 +0100 Message-ID: <60373.1015917340@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message , Garance A Drosihn writes: >So, as far as userland stat() goes, a 64-bit inode is pretty >easy, but I would like to see us set the stage for the other >things we keep talking about. All of those require a bigger >struct-stat, and I can't think of any pretty way of doing >that and also maintaining binary compatibility. ... as I keep telling you :-) A new size for struct stat is part of the UFS2 effort, in fact I'm on the ball to do that bit. The new struct stat will be big enough that we can expand all relevant fields. UFS2 is aimed at 5.0 if at all possible. So please relax, things are happening. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message