Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:35:49 -0600 | From | "Jeff V. Merkey" <> | Subject | Re: 2GIG-file |
| |
Yipes! Let me try to build the latest and see what happenes. You may want to try an earlier 2.4.X-test if this one's busted -- the lead(bleed)ing edge you know ....
:-)
Jeff
marek@foundmoney.com wrote: > > To make matters worse, I downloaded 2.4.test5 to see how many more clients I can bench > press against this box, but > > I get this when I do make bzImage ( I did do make menuconfig and make dep before > ofcourse) > > gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2 > -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -march=i686 -fno-strict-aliasing -c -o tdfx_drv.o > tdfx_drv.c > tdfx_drv.c: In function `tdfx_lock': > tdfx_drv.c:626: structure has no member named `priority' > tdfx_drv.c:626: `DEF_PRIORITY' undeclared (first use in this function) > tdfx_drv.c:626: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once > tdfx_drv.c:626: for each function it appears in.) > tdfx_drv.c: In function `tdfx_unlock': > tdfx_drv.c:672: structure has no member named `priority' > tdfx_drv.c:672: `DEF_PRIORITY' undeclared (first use in this function) > make[4]: *** [tdfx_drv.o] Error 1 > make[4]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux/drivers/char/drm' > make[3]: *** [first_rule] Error 2 > make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux/drivers/char/drm' > make[2]: *** [_subdir_drm] Error 2 > make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux/drivers/char' > make[1]: *** [_subdir_char] Error 2 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux/drivers' > make: *** [_dir_drivers] Error 2 > > "Jeff V. Merkey" wrote: > > > I stand corrected. Looks like smbfs in 2.2.X uses a long long * > > (loff_t) so this should work. > > > > :-) > > > > Jeff > > > > "Jeff V. Merkey" wrote: > > > > > > Alan Cox wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Al, Linus, and Alan -- 2GB liit is probably something to look at > > > > > expanding in the future to support these huge SQL server database files. > > > > > > > > Indeed. Thats why there are 2.2 patches and 2.4test already zapped it. I think > > > > the limit is now about 1Tb for a file and hit due to block layer limits > > > > > > But not for everything. The 2.2.X VFS is limited to 2GB (since the fs > > > drivers were coded this way). I treat the off_t field as an unsigned > > > long so I'm at 4GB. 2.4.X does support big files, but this guy was > > > asking about "commercial" linux distributions he could get his hands on, > > > and most folks are still on 2.2.X. Some of the FS drivers treat this > > > field as a signed long in 2.2.X. > > > > > > I've known about the LargeFS patches for some time, but do they, for > > > example, let someone using ncpfs read and write a 4GB file on a NetWare > > > server? No, they don't because the read() and write() functions are > > > limited to 2GB in 2.2.X. This support is for EXT% variants and isn't > > > global across all the fs's. He has to get the data to the system > > > somehow, and it's a good bet he will be using a network to do it. Which > > > client can support copying of a 3.4GB file on Linux in the question-- > > > SMBFS since it's an NT server -- I don't think so? Since the VFS is > > > limited to 2GB, I guess he can install large FS support, then stare at > > > the system and wonder how to get the file onto it. > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > Jeff > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |