On 12/16/2014 7:04 PM, Rick Macklem wrote: > Bryan Drewery wrote: >> On 12/16/2014 4:58 PM, Rick Macklem wrote: >>> FYI, I am planning on stripping the old NFS code out of head >>> on about Mon. Dec 22. This has been discussed before and most >>> seemed to be in favour of it. >>> >>> If you see a big problem with this, please email soon with >>> your concerns. >>> >>> rick >> >> Mind clarifying briefly the impact of this? Does the oldnfs code >> offer a >> single benefit over the current NFS code? >> > Well, I remember one person reporting that they still use the old > NFS server and that they had problems with the new one. > > Unfortunately, these servers were used in production and they didn't > have time to update them or try and isolate what problem(s) they > experienced with the new server. No one else has reported problems > with the new code that they avoid with the old code. (One other > site has a lot of local patches for the old NFS server, but I > think they will just have to port those to the new server if/when > they want to upgrade to FreeBSD11.) Thanks. > > Unless you use "-o" on nfsd to run the old server or do > "mount -t oldnfs ..." to use the old client, there shouldn't > be any impact, since you aren't using the old NFS client/server. > > If you try and do "nfsd -o" after it is removed, nfsd replies that > the server isn't available and doesn't start. > For "mount -t oldnfs ...", it fails after the code is removed. > > I, personally, don't care if it removed, but others have suggested > it (I suspect to reduce "code bloat" and the fact keeping it means > maintaining two NFS subsystems.) Yes, let's not rehash that. If it's been decided then let's stick to it. No sense having dual stacks if there's no benefits. > > rick > >> -- >> Regards, >> Bryan Drewery >> >> -- Regards, Bryan Drewery
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:54 UTC