this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2025
25 points (93.1% liked)
Linux
9570 readers
293 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, the issue was a genuine bug:
The
fullblock
option is an input flag (iflag=fullblock
) to ensure thatdd
will always read a full block's worth of data before writing it. Its absence means thatdd
only performscount
reads and hence might read less thanblocksize x count
worth of data. That is according to the documentation for every other implementation I could find, withuutils
currently lacking documentation, and there is nothing to suggest thatdd
might not write the data that it did read withoutfullblock
.Until recently it was also an extension to the POSIX standard, with none of tools that I am aware of behaving like
uutils
, but as of POSIX.1-2024 standard the option is described as follows (source):I can also not conceive of a situation in which you would want a program like
dd
to silent drop data in the middle of a stream, certainly not as the default behavior, so conditioning writes on this flag didn't make any sense in the first place