On 13/11/2017 17:02, Ed Maste wrote:
> On 7 November 2017 at 13:12, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>
>> I hope that lld is not that widely used now.
>> But I admit that I put the cart before the horse.
>> I didn't expect that posix_fallocate is used in the development toolchain
>> and I
>> didn't try to ch
On 7 November 2017 at 13:12, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
> I hope that lld is not that widely used now.
> But I admit that I put the cart before the horse.
> I didn't expect that posix_fallocate is used in the development toolchain and
> I
> didn't try to check for it.
For amd64 it is probably not a v
On 06/11/2017 19:26, Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 17:40 +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> From UPDATING:
>> The naive and non-compliant support of posix_fallocate(2) in ZFS
>> has been removed as of r325320. The system call now returns EINVAL
>> when used on a ZFS file. Although the new
On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 11:43:42AM -0700, Ed Maste wrote:
> On 6 November 2017 at 10:56, Ian Lepore wrote:
> >
> > Oh, right. lld != ld.
>
> Indeed, but this will be a problem for the arm64 package builds if
> they use ZFS and an 11.x userland on a new kernel. We probably need to
> bring the lld
On 6 November 2017 at 10:56, Ian Lepore wrote:
>
> Oh, right. lld != ld.
Indeed, but this will be a problem for the arm64 package builds if
they use ZFS and an 11.x userland on a new kernel. We probably need to
bring the lld change in as an errata.
___
On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 12:49 -0500, Allan Jude wrote:
> On 2017-11-06 12:26, Ian Lepore wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 17:40 +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> > >
> > > From UPDATING:
> > > The naive and non-compliant support of posix_fallocate(2) in ZFS
> > > has been removed as of r325320. The
On 2017-11-06 12:26, Ian Lepore wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 17:40 +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> From UPDATING:
>> The naive and non-compliant support of posix_fallocate(2) in ZFS
>> has been removed as of r325320. The system call now returns EINVAL
>> when used on a ZFS file. Although the new
On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 17:40 +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> From UPDATING:
> The naive and non-compliant support of posix_fallocate(2) in ZFS
> has been removed as of r325320. The system call now returns EINVAL
> when used on a ZFS file. Although the new behavior complies with the
> standard, some c
>From UPDATING:
The naive and non-compliant support of posix_fallocate(2) in ZFS
has been removed as of r325320. The system call now returns EINVAL
when used on a ZFS file. Although the new behavior complies with the
standard, some consumers are not prepared to cope with it.
One known victim is