Related topics

C programing and EEPROMs....HELP!!!!!!
Martin Husemann mar...@duskware.de fa netbsd bugs Number: 33176 Category: kern Synopsis: coda filehandles are too big on 64 bit archs Confidential: no Severity: but maybe this is enough: Index: coda.h =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/src/sys/coda/coda.h,v

2GB file limit ftp/scp Linux kernel 2.4.2 problem
Your copy of php does not appear to be compiled with the 64 bit integer sizes, which are required for files larger than 2 gb. That is required since the library Therefore many applications are not compiled as 64 bit apps unless you do that yourself, since very few tasks require access to such large files.

kern/33176: coda filehandles are too big on 64 bit archs
Can it hurt performance if it is too big? The only reason I can see to increase the page size is to force the InterBase server to use more memory. 1GB or 200GB database file size ... etc. Charlie Quinn Wildman wrote: I've never heard of a 64 bit version that was even implemented. However, a 64 bit version does

Error Uncompressing Large Files...
... Rudi Starcevic wrote: mv camper.dump20020116 camper_bak/ The error I get is :: mv: camper.dump20020116: Value too large for defined data type Maybe you are using 32-bit software instead of using 64-bit. Maybe you need to use newer fileutils package. Also, make sure your kernel supports big files too.

>2GB file support
Any idea what this randomness is? might the "Value too large for defined data type" be thrown if the system runs out of memory? These jobs get up to over a half a gig memory used. It was compiled (and is running) on a 64-bit machine. My life would be greatly simplified if i could run these syncs as single chunks,

#34750 [Opn]: filesize()/stat() fails on too big files
I know DEK doesn't run on a 64-bit machine. So the loop decomposition had to be done by hand. That's computers, not math. Semantics . Number ranges are often too big for anything other than floating point. Notwithstanding, there is always a problem of retaining some numerical significance so multiple precision

2.6.0-test3-mm1
If 32 bits is too small and 64 is too big, what next? b) Number of operands, sources and destinations, specified in an instruction 2 versus 3 address form >2 Some other register file paritions are possible architecturally, but get increasingly more awkward: Address vs. Data Integers Store and Load Buffers

Applying regexen/grammars to <foo> objects (was Re: String API)
With a 64-bit binary field, programs will use 64-bit types. With an ASCII format, every program will use a different type. Or if you really want to handle big numbers, you use a bignum package for fdisk. It's not like there's a magic solution with _current_ partition tables for handling numbers that are too big.

Sun & Intel have finally come to an agreement about IA-64
The problem is Samba 2.0.x and the 64 bit aspect of Solaris 2.6 (Sparc, not Intel). Specifically, it's the configure script that compiles the program. Samba compiles with warning messages about shifting counts being too big (ntrans.c, reply.c, trans2.c and util.c) when the large file support flags are removed.

Ghostscript FAQ
... file entry finding - Fast contiguous file reading (ie, as little fragmentation as possible) - Efficient storing algorithm avoiding fragmentation - Unicode filenames (64 chars, maybe more) - Expandable in terms of hard disk size, probably 64-bit and flexible allocation unit size (if your hard disk is too big for

> 2GB "file too large", AIX 4.2, perl 5.001, not "ulimit"
Hi, It is my understanding that with 64 bit there is no limit of 4 GB anymore, am I wrong? When running the Exchange Analyzer I got a warning about the size of my servers pagefile. It was too big. If the Exchange Analyzer determines that the value for the Win32_PageFile MaximumSize key is larger than 1.5 times the

Early memory patch, revised
You might need to compile a special version (64 bit) if your OS supports it. Persumably it does since you have such a file in the first place. M On 15 Mar, Guolin Cheng wrote: Hi, Any one know how to deal with the following problem? I tried to delete some files but failed since file's size is a little too big (8GB)

Does gunzip have a file size limit ?
7319 files to consider recovery/archives/t34a/2004-05-26,13:58 write failed on "/backup/recovery/archives/t34a/2004-05-26,13:58": File too large rsync error: error in rsync-2.5.6/io.c(515) The server is HP/UX 11i 64bit, the client HP/UX 11i 32bit and both are running server # rsync --version rsync version 2.5.6

MIPS multiply
But if you tried to call nc_open on such a file on a platform without LFS, you would get a "file too large" error. But I might still call such text files "platform-independent". As far as I know, all 64-bit architectures have LFS, but now some 32-bit architectures do also (such as Linux).

Ontape returns errno 27
I found that if the process image is larger than 2GB, it will create a corefile of size 2GB and write a message "dumpcore(): write: File too large", On 64 bit kernels it's a 64 bit program which can handle large files. On 32 bit kernel it appears it is not large file aware (you get the 32 bit copy) Then I tried

Performance problem--memory bloat or crawl
"bzImage or "); + if (!is_big_kernel && sys_size > DEF_SYSSIZE) + die("System is too big. Try using bzImage or modules."); while (sz > 0) { int l, n; We need one bit for + * each possible page, which currently means 2^36/4096/8 = 2 MB + * (64-bit-capable chips can do more, but if you have more than 64 GB + * of

gcore greater than 2GB
On 64-bit machine doing a get: --------------------- ftp> get tro240longpostproc.tgz local: tro240longpostproc.tgz remote: tro240longpostproc.tgz 200 PORT command successful. 550 tro240longpostproc.tgz: File too large. I think this is the same error. Same message with scp or normal ftp program(ie non-Kerberos

6502 illegal opcodes questions
One that can deal with extremely large files and partitions. Just to name one example: the ext2 filesystem supports up to 4 TB, so according to your definition ext2 is a 64-bit file system. Have you ever seen a 4 TB disk? So we can safely say that no disk is too big for the ext2 filesystem. True.

For Sun PCI as "toy" (excel, word): install win-2000 or XA?
Unlike Red Hat prelink, RelCache method can be very easily applied to non-x86 platform with additional code to Rela/64-bit support. Every ELf based platform in NetBSD will be able to make use of it. "Cache files are too big." I'd say they are not so big on today's cheap 80 GB drives. ;-) Currently I'm on

fopen - File too large
Martin Husemann mar...@duskware.de muc lists netbsd bugs Number: 33176 Category: kern Synopsis: coda filehandles are too big on 64 bit archs but maybe this is enough: Index: coda.h =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/src/sys/coda/coda.h,v retrieving revision