Hello Junjiro, sf...@users.sourceforge.net skrev 2013-06-22 17:33: > Hello Christian, > > Christian Huldt: >> I filed a bug report with samba as the mv command works, but the initial >> response was : >> >>> Get a debug level 10 log of smbd running on top of aufs and failing, >>> vs the same log of smbd running without aufs doing the same client >>> operation and succeeding. Log a bug with bugzilla.samba.org and upload >>> both logs. >>> >>> This will tell us what aufs is doing wrong in terms of being a POSIX >>> filesystem. We can use that to feed back to the aufs developers to >>> what they need to fix. >> >> so I thought I mention it here as well > > Hmm, it may be good to post here, but I don't know what is wrong. Should > I wait until the samba developer tells the point specifically? > > About renaming a dir, there is a description in the aufs manual. > Is this your case? > ---------------------------------------- > .SH Incompatible with an Ordinary Filesystem > ::: > To rename(2) directory may return EXDEV even if both of src and tgt > are on the same aufs. When the rename-src dir exists on multiple > branches and the lower dir has child(ren), aufs has to copyup all his > children. It can be recursive copyup. Current aufs does not support > such huge copyup operation at one time in kernel space, instead > produces a warning and returns EXDEV. > Generally, mv(1) detects this error and tries mkdir(2) and > rename(2) or copy/unlink recursively. So the result is harmless. > If your application which issues rename(2) for a directory does not > support EXDEV, it will not work on aufs. > Also this specification is applied to the case when the src directory > exists on the lower readonly branch and it has child(ren). > ----------------------------------------
Yes, this sounds very reasonable, the human readable error message is "NT_STATUS_NOT_SAME_DEVICE" Does that mean that I should kill the bug? I'm not knowledgeable enough to now if this is a requirement for being a POSIX compliant filesystem. > > >> I guess that aufs on ubuntu 12.04 is regarded as ancient... > > Yes, ubuntu says that aufs will be deprecated for years, but they seem > still be using it. I'd suggest you to check the aufs version (which is > printed when the aufs module is loaded) in ubuntu since it might be very > old. > > >> https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9966 > > Unfortunately I am not a samba developer and I don't understand the > samba log. > > > J. R. Okajima > -- Christian Huldt +46704612207 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
