Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 07:14:44 -0500 From: Astrodog <astrodog@gmail.com> To: "Bruce Evans" <brde@optusnet.com.au> Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org, linimon@freebsd.org Subject: Re: amd64/74811: [nfs] df, nfs mount, negative Avail -> 32/64-bit confusion Message-ID: <2fd864e0709180514w627bb198r46f4ddecb212fd77@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <2fd864e0709180453l756d37c6y7dac8fa5fa8fcf15@mail.gmail.com> References: <200709180037.l8I0bJb1003933@freefall.freebsd.org> <20070918211449.A75529@besplex.bde.org> <2fd864e0709180453l756d37c6y7dac8fa5fa8fcf15@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 9/18/07, Astrodog <astrodog@gmail.com> wrote: > On 9/18/07, Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 linimon@FreeBSD.org wrote: > > > > > Synopsis: [nfs] df, nfs mount, negative Avail -> 32/64-bit confusion > > > > > > State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback > > > State-Changed-By: linimon > > > State-Changed-When: Tue Sep 18 00:35:32 UTC 2007 > > > State-Changed-Why: > > > To submitter: is this bug still present in 6.2 or -current? If it's a > > > 4.x-only problem, it's time to close it, since 4.x is no longer supported. > > > > -current still breaks negative avail counts on the server by clamping them > > them to 0, so the bug is less obvious on buggy clients. > > > > Bruce > > It appears that RFC 1094 calls for blocks free to be unsigned (2.2.8). > I don't know how this could be handled, besides clamping, though. > > --- Harrison > Rather, it calls for blocks free, and blocks availible to be unsigned. D'oh. --- Harrison
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2fd864e0709180514w627bb198r46f4ddecb212fd77>