On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 10:07:13PM -0500, der Mouse wrote:
Of course, still better would be to fix vnd, though I'm not sure what
the right fix would be.
What's the problem? My vague understanding was that you could get into
deadlocks allocating blocks, but maybe I'm confusing it with
hi,
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 10:07:13PM -0500, der Mouse wrote:
Of course, still better would be to fix vnd, though I'm not sure what
the right fix would be.
What's the problem? My vague understanding was that you could get into
deadlocks allocating blocks, but maybe I'm confusing it
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 04:58:16AM +, David Holland wrote:
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 10:07:13PM -0500, der Mouse wrote:
Of course, still better would be to fix vnd, though I'm not sure what
the right fix would be.
What's the problem? My vague understanding was that you could get into
hi,
i'd like to remove the sparseness check in vnd because there's
no problem to use a sparse files on nfs. dsl, is it ok?
YAMAMOTO Takashi
revision 1.205
date: 2009/12/06 16:33:18; author: dsl; state: Exp; lines: +23 -3
Make vnd_size (the returned size) 64 bit, keeping old field for ioctl
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 01:42:50PM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
hi,
i'd like to remove the sparseness check in vnd because there's
no problem to use a sparse files on nfs. dsl, is it ok?
Given it doesn't work for local files and they are more common I don't
think sparse files should be
yamt@ wrote:
i'd like to remove the sparseness check in vnd because there's
no problem to use a sparse files on nfs.
We really want vnd on sparse files for emulator images...
---
Izumi Tsutsui
On Sun Feb 06 2011 at 00:08:33 +0900, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
yamt@ wrote:
i'd like to remove the sparseness check in vnd because there's
no problem to use a sparse files on nfs.
We really want vnd on sparse files for emulator images...
I have this in my /etc/fstab:
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 01:42:50PM +, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
hi,
i'd like to remove the sparseness check in vnd because there's
no problem to use a sparse files on nfs. dsl, is it ok?
I think that the sparseness check should stay until vnd supports
sparse files. I think that between
I think that the sparseness check should stay until vnd supports
sparse files.
It already does, under some circumstances (eg, NFS-remote).
I _would_ prefer to see an override for cases like NFS, or where the
values returned trip the test even though the file is not sparse in the
sense vnd
