From: Tobias Klausmann Subject: Re: UFS maintainer and a bug in ufs/super.c Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 12:06:02 +0200 Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20020430100602.GA29392@tuts.net> References: <20020417100422.GB1322@tuts.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020417100422.GB1322@tuts.net> List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Hi! On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Tobias Klausmann wrote: > Hi! > > First off: Is Daniel Pirkl still the > official UFS maintainer? If not whom do I send the stuff below > to? I tried to contact Daniel but haven't heard back from him in > a while. The list archives contain another message by someone who > was seeking out the UFS maintainer but never got an answer. Neither did I get one here. Why? Is xBSD an OS non grata? I mean... it's a bloody 7 character patch! At least some pointer would have been helpful. This is not a high-volume list, so to me it looks like people just don't give a rat's ass. VERY disappointing, guys. > The problem is this: > Read support for UFS assumes that fs_bsize is one of 4096, 8192, > 32768. Now this worked for a long time, but recently, FreeBSD > ships with a newfs(8) that uses a fs_bsize of 16384 by default. > > I don't know why 16834 is omitted in ufs/super.c, but inserting > the numbers in the appropriate places at least fixes read > support. Given the thoroughly experimental nature of write > support, I didn't try to mess with that. > > So, whom do I send the patch to? The question remains unanswered.