Home > Linux Error > Linux Error Not On The Same File System

Linux Error Not On The Same File System

If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place! All of them have been fine for > months, but now on one of them I can't delete any files. In general, the behavior of O_EXCL is undefined if it is used without O_CREAT. VERSIONS top openat() was added to Linux in kernel 2.6.16; library support was added to glibc in version 2.4. weblink

O_TMPFILE (since Linux 3.11) Create an unnamed temporary file. The behavior of O_DIRECT with NFS will differ from local filesystems. The NFS protocol does not support passing the flag to the server, so O_DIRECT I/O will bypass the page cache only on the client; the server may still cache the I/O. Contact Us - Advertising Info - Rules - LQ Merchandise - Donations - Contributing Member - LQ Sitemap - Main Menu Linux Forum Android Forum Chrome OS Forum Search LQ http://www.centos.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=15625

Synchronized I/O The POSIX.1-2008 "synchronized I/O" option specifies different variants of synchronized I/O, and specifies the open() flags O_SYNC, O_DSYNC, and O_RSYNC for controlling the behavior. drop it in the trash icon 4. It deletes fineCreate a folder on the desktop. EFAULT oldpath or newpath points outside your accessible address space.

How to deal with a coworker who is making fun of my work? Some filesystems may not implement the flag and open() will fail with EINVAL if it is used. Also, you can suppress error messages adding ` 2> /dev/null` to the command line. –pqnet Sep 5 '14 at 0:32 add a comment| up vote 0 down vote I don't think renameat2() renameat2() has an additional flags argument.

The full list of file creation flags and file status flags is as follows: O_APPEND The file is opened in append mode. You could also try the FileUtils.moveFile method from Apache Commons. What to do when you've put your co-worker on spot by being impatient? "the Salsa20 core preserves diagonal shifts" Why does Luke ignore Yoda's advice? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579502 When oldpath and newpath are relative pathnames, glibc constructs pathnames based on the symbolic links in /proc/self/fd that correspond to the olddirfd and newdirfd arguments.

livewirerc Linux - General 0 10-22-2003 01:23 PM Error deleting file? The O_DIRECT flag on its own makes an effort to transfer data synchronously, but does not give the guarantees of the O_SYNC flag that data and necessary metadata are transferred. A "whiteout" is an object that has special meaning in union/overlay filesystem constructs. Also, maybe this is a mount needed for the chroot jail and you better leave it.

share|improve this answer answered Sep 4 '14 at 15:21 pqnet 1,3701512 So if there's nothing after this statement, it simply means the file wasn't found? –user1780242 Sep 4 '14 Thus, O_DSYNC would only guarantee to flush updates to the file length metadata (whereas O_SYNC would also always flush the last modification timestamp metadata). In general this will degrade performance, but it is useful in special situations, such as when applications do their own caching. EMLINK oldpath already has the maximum number of links to it, or it was a directory and the directory containing newpath has the maximum number of links.

Such sharing can also occur between processes: a child process created via fork(2) inherits duplicates of its parent's file descriptors, and those duplicates refer to the same open file descriptions. have a peek at these guys Main Menu LQ Calendar LQ Rules LQ Sitemap Site FAQ View New Posts View Latest Posts Zero Reply Threads LQ Wiki Most Wanted Jeremy's Blog Report LQ Bug Syndicate Latest FreeBSD 4.x introduced a flag of the same name, but without alignment restrictions. Just starting out and have a question?

The following additional errors can occur for openat(): EBADF dirfd is not a valid file descriptor. Cheers, Tink Tinkster View Public Profile View LQ Blog View Review Entries View HCL Entries View LQ Wiki Contributions Find More Posts by Tinkster View Blog Thread Tools Show If oldpath refers to a symbolic link, the link is renamed; if newpath refers to a symbolic link, the link will be overwritten. check over here This ensures that applications compiled against new headers get at least O_DSYNC semantics on pre-2.6.33 kernels.

This Bugzilla will soon be CLOSED as WONTFIX (at the end of RHEL5.11 development phase (Apr 22, 2014)). Research indicates the fix is to delete the hard link /var/named/chroot/var/named/ using rm -f and recreate it as a directory but when I do this I am advised that it can't Why don't we construct a spin 1/4 spinor?

For some reason it cannot move your remote file to the trashcan.

EINVAL Both RENAME_NOREPLACE and RENAME_EXCHANGE were specified in flags. This flag was added in kernel version 2.1.126, to avoid denial-of- service problems if opendir(3) is called on a FIFO or tape device. How exactly std::string_view is faster than const std::string&? Or, a directory component in pathname does not exist or is a dangling symbolic link.

On the machine which serves the nfs > shares deleting using rm works fine (it doesn't have Nautilus). If newpath already exists, it will be atomically replaced, so that there is no point at which another process attempting to access newpath will find it missing. In fact program such as "mv" handle this situation by doing an explicit copy followed by delete operation. –ghostkadost May 11 '12 at 6:19 add a comment| up vote 6 down this content error comes up.

When moving a file from one NFS share to another I receive: "error not on the same file system." I'm running: gnome-vfs2-2.16.2-6.el5_5.1.x86_64.rpm Comment 7 RHEL Product and Program Management 2011-09-22 20:50:30 Search this Thread 11-22-2010, 01:28 PM #1 yaximik Member Registered: Nov 2010 Posts: 87 Rep: "Not on the same file system" error Hello, I saw on the net messages Comment 3 Tuomo Soini 2010-04-06 16:39:35 EDT I did some testing and this seem to be regression caused by: # https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438116 # Can't move files between different NFS mounts Patch22: gnome-vfs-2.16.2-same-fs.patch Please contact your account manager or support representative in case you need to escalate this bug.

The whole operation needs to be done atomically. This is because the client performs open() by checking the permissions, but UID mapping is performed by the server upon read and write requests. Specifying RENAME_WHITEOUT creates a "whiteout" object at the source of the rename at the same time as performing the rename. Files are physically located in /data2 and symlinked to desktop, both the mountpoint and a subdirectory containing test file.

Not the answer you're looking for? To guarantee synchronous I/O, O_SYNC must be used in addition to O_DIRECT. ENOSPC pathname was to be created but the device containing pathname has no room for the new file. For details of in-depth Linux/UNIX system programming training courses that I teach, look here.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug. O_PATH (since Linux 2.6.39) Obtain a file descriptor that can be used for two purposes: to indicate a location in the filesystem tree and to perform operations that act purely at How exactly std::string_view is faster than const std::string&? renameat() The renameat() system call operates in exactly the same way as rename(), except for the differences described here.

Older kernels, or kernels configured in certain ways, may not support this combination. android. Comment 4 Ivan Stojmirov 2010-08-30 07:29:48 EDT I can delete directly (using SHIFT+DEL), but moving to trash fails (just DEL). Circus.

As long as gnomevfs-mv contains just the simple gnome_vfs_move() call, it can't be used as a reproducer. Does RHLE provide a patch or something to go around this? --Ricardo > (In reply to comment #0) > > I now know how to reproduce the error via terminal. >