---------- Início da mensagem original -----------
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Data: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 12:02:01 -0500
Assunto: Jfs-discussion digest, Vol 1 #498 - 4 msgs
> Send Jfs-discussion mailing list submissions to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
visit
> http://www-
124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/jfs-
discussion
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or
body 'help' to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is
more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Jfs-discussion digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: kernel 2.6.4: Bug in JFS file system?
(Andreas Theofilu)
> 2. [Fwd: Re: [Jfs-discussion] (no subject)] (Dave
Kleikamp)
> 3. Re: (no subject) (Dave Kleikamp)
> 4. Re: kernel 2.6.4: Bug in JFS file system? (Dave
Kleikamp)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 19:59:52 +0100
> From: Andreas Theofilu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Dave Kleikamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
126.southbury.usf.ibm.com
> Organization: Theos Soft
> Subject: [Jfs-discussion] Re: kernel 2.6.4: Bug in
JFS file system?
>
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 07:45:17 -0600
> Dave Kleikamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, existing files with a non-zero high
byte in a character
> > are no longer accessible. jfs should have printed
a syslog message
> > recommending that the file system be mounted with
iocharset=utf8 to
> > access the file.
> >
> Thanks for that information. I didn't found any
syslog message, but
> mounting the partition with iocharset=utf8 brought
back the previous
> unaccessible files.Now everything is working fine
again.
>
> --
> Andreas Theofilu
> http://www.TheosSoft.net/
>
> --==| Enjoy the science of
Linux! |==--
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> Subject: [Fwd: Re: [Jfs-discussion] (no subject)]
> From: Dave Kleikamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Domenico Di Tullio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: JFS Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
126.southbury.usf.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 14:10:20 -0600
>
> I'm resending this since I didn't see it appear on
the jfs-discussion
> list. Did you receive the original reply, Domenico?
>
> -----Forwarded Message-----
> From: Dave Kleikamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Domenico Di Tullio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: JFS Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
124.southbury.usf.ibm.com>
> Subject: Re: [Jfs-discussion] (no subject)
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:06:53 -0600
>
> On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 08:49, Domenico Di Tullio wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I would to know for the jfs file system the follows
characteristics :
>
> > - max total number of files;
> This is limited by the 32-bit inode number, so just
under 4G.
>
> > -max total number of directories;
> again just under 4G. files + directories < 4G.
>
> > -max number of files per directories;
> just under 4G. I think it might be 4G-3, but I'm not
exactly sure.
>
> > -max file size;
> 2^52, or 4 Petabytes. blocksize = 4K, and jfs used
40 bits to store the
> block number. This also limits the file system size
on 64-bit systems.
>
> > -max number of simultaneously opened files.
> jfs has no limit. I'm not sure what limits this in
the vfs.
> --
> David Kleikamp
> IBM Linux Technology Center
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> Subject: Re: [Jfs-discussion] (no subject)
> From: Dave Kleikamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Domenico Di Tullio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: JFS Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
126.southbury.usf.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:06:53 -0600
>
> On Wed, 2004-03-24 at 08:49, Domenico Di Tullio wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I would to know for the jfs file system the follows
charateristics :
>
> > - max total number of files;
> This is limited by the 32-bit inode number, so just
under 4G.
>
> > -max total number of directories;
> again just under 4G. files + directories < 4G.
>
> > -max number of files per directories;
> just under 4G. I think it might be 4G-3, but I'm not
exactly sure.
>
> > -max file size;
> 2^52, or 4 Petabytes. blocksize = 4K, and jfs used
40 bits to store the
> block number. This also limits the file system size
on 64-bit systems.
>
> > -max number of simultaneously opened files.
> jfs has no limit. I'm not sure what limits this in
the vfs.
>
> --
> David Kleikamp
> IBM Linux Technology Center
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 4
> From: Dave Kleikamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Andreas Theofilu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: linux-kernel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> JFS Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
126.southbury.usf.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 07:45:17 -0600
> Subject: [Jfs-discussion] Re: kernel 2.6.4: Bug in
JFS file system?
>
> On Tue, 2004-03-23 at 12:55, Andreas Theofilu wrote:
> > Hi to all,
> >
> > Since kernel 2.6.4 I'm not able to access files
with a special character
> > in the file name, such as the german umlaute. Every
attempt to access such
> > a file gives me the error: cannot stat file
>
> I did this to you. I changed jfs's default character
translation
> behavior. jfs stores the file names in ucs-16. It
had used the
> character set defined by CONFIG_NLS_DEFAULT to
determine how to
> translate to or from ucs-16. This can be overridden
with the iocharset=
> mount option.
>
> After many complaints about characters that were
being rejected by jfs,
> and after getting as much feedback as I was able to
obtain, I changed
> the default behavior so that no translation is done.
Each byte of the
> file name is now stored in the lower byte of the ucs-
16 character.
> (This is equivalent to iocharset=iso8859-1, which is
the default value
> of CONFIG_NLS_DEFAULT.)
>
> Unfortunately, existing files with a non-zero high
byte in a character
> are no longer accessible. jfs should have printed a
syslog message
> recommending that the file system be mounted with
iocharset=utf8 to
> access the file.
>
> > I'm using several partitions with JFS file system
and had never seen such
> > a strange behavior before. The relevant kernel
settings are at the bottom
> > of the mail.
> >
> > I already unmounted the partition and run fsck on
it (fsck.jfs -f
> > /dev/hda8), but it told me that everything is ok
and I'm still not able to
> > access this files. Also a reboot of the machine
didn't change anything. I
> > booted 2.6.3 again and renamed the files in
question (no more special
> > characters in the file name). Now I can access
these files with 2.6.4
> > also.
>
> Another alternative would have been to mount the
filesystem with "-o
> iocharset=<charset>" where <charset> is the value of
> CONFIG_NLS_DEFAULT. To make that behavior permanent,
you can add the
> iocharset= flag to /etc/fstab.
>
> > Although I'm a programmer, I'm not a kernel hacker
and don't know where
> > to start looking for this problem. Could anybody
give me a hint where to
> > start looking?
>
> I'm sorry this caused you problems. I knew making
this change would
> cause some confusion, but I think in the long run,
jfs is better off
> with a more predictable default behavior.
>
> --
> David Kleikamp
> IBM Linux Technology Center
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jfs-discussion mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www-
124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/jfs-
discussion
>
>
> End of Jfs-discussion Digest
>
__________________________________________________________________________
Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela.
AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis!
http://antipopup.uol.com.br/
_______________________________________________
Jfs-discussion mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/jfs-discussion
