Message-ID: <47B352D5.3080201@cygwin.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:28:05 -0500
From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" <reply-to-list-only-lh AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070505 Remi/2.0.0.0-3.fc4.remi Thunderbird/2.0.0.0 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: "tar --one-file-system" accesses remote file systems
References: <47B3413C DOT 4040007 AT cygwin DOT com> <70952A932255A2489522275A628B97C30620E123 AT xmb-sjc-233 DOT amer DOT cisco DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <70952A932255A2489522275A628B97C30620E123@xmb-sjc-233.amer.cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
>> From: Larry Hall (Cygwin) 
>>
>> Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
>>>> Matt Seitz (matseitz) wrote:
>>>>> This problem and a proposed solution was mentioned in an earlier 
>>>>> e'mail 
>> (http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/1998-09/msg00839.html). 
>>> Ah, yes, the mounted CIFS share is reported as a FAT file 
>>> system*. 
>> That's it I expect.  Going straight to the code, in 
>> fhandler_disk_file.cc, here's some code from 
>> fhandler_base::fstat_helper():
>>
>>    /* Enforce namehash as inode number on untrusted file systems. */
>>    if (pc.isgood_inode (nFileIndex))
>>      buf->st_ino = (__ino64_t) nFileIndex;
>>    else
>>      buf->st_ino = get_namehash ();
>>
>> One of the things that isgood_inode() checks for is that it's 
>> not a FAT drive.  In case it is, you end up with a faked hash inode.
> 
> Thanks for the diagnosis. I'm curious about something. The message I
> reference above also mentioned an issue with "st_dev". It seems to imply
> that correcting the "st_dev" to use the volume serial number could resolve
> this issue. What is your opinion on that theory?

Given that the message you found refers to code that's a good 10 years
old, I think it's safe to assume that things here have changed. ;-)
And they have.  I found no "42" anywhere in the code that is related
to st_dev.  So that "oddness" is now gone.

-- 
Larry Hall                              http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc.                      (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
216 Dalton Rd.                          (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
 > Q: Are you sure?
 >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
 >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/