bug#8294: Minor nit with dd

[Jim Meyering]

tags 8294 moreinfo
close 8294
thanks

Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 03/19/2011 11:26 AM, John Morris wrote:
>> On a 64bit platform shouldn't the following command have done the
>> expected thing instead of quietly clipping to 231?
>
> It depends on what your platform's 64-bit 'read'
> system call does.  My guess is that your platform's
> 'read' syscall refuses to read more than
> 2**31 - 2**12 bytes at a time from /dev/zero,
> so the problem (if any :-) is with 'read', not
> with 'dd'.

Thanks for replying, Paul.

John,
If the read system call were failing and dd were ignoring that failure,
that would be a bug.  However, dd is careful to check for that sort of
thing.  Here, read is returning after readling less than a full block,
and that's fine.  It's a so-called short read.  If you want dd to
accumulate full blocks, use GNU dd's iflag=fullblock option.