* Martin Blapp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010225 11:44] wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> nfsd.c has the following lines:
>
> (void)signal(SIGQUIT, SIG_IGN);
> (void)signal(SIGTERM, SIG_IGN);
>
> So nfsd(8) can only be killed by -9. Does this make
> sense ? Unregistering withing rpcbind or portmap is
> not possible, so one has to kill portmap(8) or rpcbind(8)
> and restart all the rpc services which had registered
> themself within portmapper. Very very bad.
Well, I would check the CVS logs to see why it had been done, if
it came like that from 4.4BSD then we should change it, but otherwise
consider why it was added.
> This also rises some questions about 'nfsd -r'. This
> flag is used to reregister an existing nfsd within
> portmapper or rpcbind. But since we use 'nfsd -h'
> to allow nfsd to bind to one or more IP's, it's
> broken for some part cause the wrong addresses get
> registered. It's better to kill nfsd and restart
> it.
>
> So my first proposal is to remove the SIG_IGN lines and
> adding a signal handler for unregistering nfs within
> portmapper or rpcbind.
>
> Second, I'd like to have this 'nfsd -r' removed, cause
> it's broken in the concept anyway and useless. Kill nfsd and
> restart does the same, and the binding is done the right way.
I'd like to kill 'nfsd -r' however it makes more sense to fix -r
so that it works with -h than to just remove the functionality.
--
-Alfred Perlstein - [[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
