From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 12 14:20:02 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41F1D16A4CE; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:20:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from beastie.mckusick.com (beastie.mckusick.com [209.31.233.184]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2626243FDF; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:19:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mckusick@beastie.mckusick.com) Received: from beastie.mckusick.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by beastie.mckusick.com (8.12.8/8.12.3) with ESMTP id hACMJwaG007327; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:19:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mckusick@beastie.mckusick.com) Message-Id: <200311122219.hACMJwaG007327@beastie.mckusick.com> To: "Brian F. Feldman" In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:16:07 EST." <200311121916.hACJG7ok002154@green.bikeshed.org> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:19:58 -0800 From: Kirk McKusick cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: Scott Long cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/bin/df df.c src/sys/kern syscalls.master vfs_bio.c vfs_cluster.c vfs_syscalls.c src/sys/sys mount.h src/sys/ufs/ffs ffs_vfsops.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:20:02 -0000 From: "Brian F. Feldman" Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:16:07 -0500 Sender: owner-src-committers@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Does this mean someone may be free to write wrappers that block ENOSYS, execute statfs calls, and fall back to ostatfs calls (translating 64->32 bit values as best as possible, like the kernel does) returning the new statfs? Obviously, this would just be to add a safety window for the transition period and to be removed before a -RELEASE. -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\ <> green@FreeBSD.org \ The Power to Serve! \ Opinions expressed are my own. \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\ The above would certainly be possible. If this were a more heavily used interface (like say stat), it would be a useful exercise. But I do not feel it is really necessary for statfs. However, I am not going to object if someone wants to go through the exercise of implementing your suggestion. Kirk McKusick