Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Garrett,
Wednesday, February 18, 2009, 5:15:52 PM, you wrote:
GDA> Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Garrett,
Wednesday, February 18, 2009, 12:26:11 AM, you wrote:
GDA> Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Garrett,
In my case I'm rsync'ing entire file systems from other servers which
are not necessarily Solaris servers. The specific device is coming
from BSD system. Looks like ZFS is handling them fine but one needs to
use 64bit userland tools, I haven't testes UFS or any other
file system.
GDA> Minor nodes are inherently not portable between systems. Why on earth
GDA> would you want to rsync them from one OS to another?
It's not about if it works in rsync or not - I was just surprised that
it is possible to create such a device with 64bit application but then
default tools like ls will fail and one has to specifically point to
64bit version of ls. I would prefer if ls was using isaexec which
would help to avoid such problems.
GDA> isaexec adds a small perf. penalty. If you really want isaexec, you
GDA> can change it on your system.
GDA> I personally am not fond of making default system utilities isaexec based.
Probably not all of them - but why are you so much concerned about
performance overhead caused by using isaexec for ls utility?
I would argue that in ls case it's more important to end-user that it
works than if it takes a little bit more time to start it.
If someone has an application which executes ls hundreds times per
second so isaexec overhead might be important than that someone could
point it's app to a specific ls - I think it's much less common case
to worry about. (then my case isn't common either...)
There are lots of scripts out in the wild. Many of them may do
surprising things, like call "ls" in a loop.
I'm not prepared to say the performance of ls is unimportant.
And yes, your case is rather an oddball -- the results would differ in a
32-bit environment vs. a 64-bit one. I'm not too thrilled about *that*
either. I actually think rsync probably has very little business trying
to copy over special nodes. (In retrospect, I wonder if mknod(2) should
be deprecated. With devfs, nobody should be creating special files
anymore....)
-- Garrett
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-code mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
