[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Is this a bug?

From: Bob Proulx
Subject: Re: Is this a bug?
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2002 13:13:57 -0700

> I mounted an NT directory on Linux using smbmount. In that directory
> NT reports test.bkf to be 5.9 gigs and Linux ls -al reports it as
> 1.6 gigs.
> Then I transferred the file to an off-site box using scp, which reported a
> successful 1.6 gig transfer and the off-site box shows a 1.6 gig file in the
> proper directory.

Hmm...  Because scp also only reported 1.6 GB it looks to be something
in the filesystem below both scp and ls.  I don't know anything about
Samba but perhaps on the Samba lists someone could make a suggestion?
This definitely looks very strange.

> here are some details:
> NT 4.0 sp5 NTFS
> Redhat 7.2 EXT3
> mount -t smbfs //machine/backup /mnt/backup
> Then from the mounted directory
> scp test.bkf ipaddress:/home/backup/test.bkf

All very good.  But what are the versions of ls?  ls --version
And the ssh folks would want the same there.  ssh -V

> On the LILAX e-mail list someone suggested this might be a problem
> arising from integer limits.

A 32-bit signed integer has a maximum 2 GB size.  If a program is
compiled -without- large file support (GNU supports large files if
configured properly) then the system will return the error ETOOBIG and
things fail.  Your reporting at 1.6 GB is well below that limit while
the file size of 5.9 GB is well above it.  A strange failure mode.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]