On Monday 2 December 2024 17:56:38 GMT Michael wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 November 2024 16:13:01 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > [New readers start here... :) ]
> >
> > I've spent several days-worth of my time over the last few weeks in trying
> > to get my i5 box to export its por
On Thursday 5 December 2024 00:55:38 GMT Alexis wrote:
> Peter Humphrey writes:
> > What does the team think can be done about it?
>
> I'm not a Gentoo dev, merely someone who (a) has Strong Opinions
> about the need for good documentation, and (b) has contributed
> significantly to various FOSS
Peter Humphrey writes:
What does the team think can be done about it?
i'm not a Gentoo dev, merely someone who (a) has Strong Opinions
about the need for good documentation, and (b) has contributed
significantly to various FOSS docs, most recently the Gentoo
wiki[a].
First and foremost,
On Tuesday 3 December 2024 13:28:44 Greenwich Mean Time I wrote:
> On Tuesday 3 December 2024 13:08:51 Greenwich Mean Time Matt Jolly wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > On 27 November 2024 2:13:01 am AEST, Peter Humphrey
> >
> wrote:
> > >Someone needs to have a look at the nfs-utils wiki page. I'd do
On Tuesday 3 December 2024 13:08:51 Greenwich Mean Time Matt Jolly wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On 27 November 2024 2:13:01 am AEST, Peter Humphrey
wrote:
> >Someone needs to have a look at the nfs-utils wiki page. I'd do something
> >myself, but how? I raised a bug against a document once, only to be
Hi Peter,
On 27 November 2024 2:13:01 am AEST, Peter Humphrey
wrote:
>Someone needs to have a look at the nfs-utils wiki page. I'd do something
>myself, but how? I raised a bug against a document once, only to be rebuked.
You can raise issues on the "Talk" page for a given article, e.g.
https
On Tuesday 3 December 2024 11:44:50 Greenwich Mean Time Michael wrote:
> ... I think there should be clearer disambiguation with separate examples
> between v3 and v4. However, isn't NFS v3 considered legacy by now?
Perhaps, but that wiki page was apparently last changed on 2 August this year.
-
On Tuesday 3 December 2024 11:29:15 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Monday 2 December 2024 17:56:38 Greenwich Mean Time Michael wrote:
> > I had (another) look at the wiki. You're right, it seems to describe
> > NFSv3
> > only. I don't have NFSv3 here to compare. With NFSv4 you export the
> > gl
On Monday 2 December 2024 17:56:38 Greenwich Mean Time Michael wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 November 2024 16:13:01 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > I've spent several days-worth of my time over the last few weeks in trying
> > to get my i5 box to export its portage tree and packages directory to a
> > chroo
On Tuesday 26 November 2024 16:13:01 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> [New readers start here... :) ]
>
> I've spent several days-worth of my time over the last few weeks in trying
> to get my i5 box to export its portage tree and packages directory to a
> chroot on my M9 machine. I r
Greetings,
[New readers start here... :) ]
I've spent several days-worth of my time over the last few weeks in trying to
get my i5 box to export its portage tree and packages directory to a chroot on
my M9 machine. I read all the docs, I thought about the help that was offered
here, I change
On Thursday 31 October 2024 14:21:27 GMT Michael wrote:
> On Thursday 31 October 2024 11:07:13 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > I've always used static addresses. The exception is the wireless network,
> > on which things come and go. I'm confident in dnsmasq on the wired LAN -
> > it's been running f
On Thursday 31 October 2024 11:07:13 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Thursday 31 October 2024 09:52:23 GMT Michael wrote:
> > Hmm ... if your NFS configuration works over wired Ethernet, but not over
> > wireless, this could point to a lower network level problem.
>
> I remember you said something
On Thursday 31 October 2024 09:52:23 GMT Michael wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 October 2024 23:24:19 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > On Thursday 17 October 2024 16:00:36 GMT I wrote:
> >
> > --->8
> >
> > Well, it looks as though I have it working, over an Ethernet link anyway.
> > There's now no /mnt/n
On Wednesday 30 October 2024 23:24:19 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Thursday 17 October 2024 16:00:36 GMT I wrote:
>
> --->8
>
> Well, it looks as though I have it working, over an Ethernet link anyway.
> There's now no /mnt/nfs with fsid=0, with the portage tree and the packages
> directory mou
On Thursday 17 October 2024 16:00:36 GMT I wrote:
--->8
Well, it looks as though I have it working, over an Ethernet link anyway.
There's now no /mnt/nfs with fsid=0, with the portage tree and the packages
directory mounted below it. This is /etc/exports on the i5:
/var/db/repos/gentoo
wstn.prh
On Wednesday 23 October 2024 12:36:23 BST Arve Barsnes wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 at 12:56, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > I should have added that the remote compilation works well with the cable.
> > I have found though that the linux-firmware ebuild requires the /boot
> > partition to be mounted,
On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 at 12:56, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> I should have added that the remote compilation works well with the cable. I
> have found though that the linux-firmware ebuild requires the /boot partition
> to be mounted, which it shouldn't be on a foreign machine, so I say
> emerge -uaDvN -
On Tuesday 22 October 2024 22:07:06 BST I wrote:
> Also while bug-hunting, I found an extra-long Ethernet cable and strung the
> i5 into the LAN that way. The M9 only ever sees the LAN, whereas I can now
> start and stop the LAN and WLAN at will on the i5. The Fritz!Box router
> sits at the juncti
On Tuesday 22 October 2024 20:29:14 BST Michael wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 October 2024 18:01:55 BST Matt Jolly wrote:
> > It should not matter; the virtual root involves bind mounting directories
> > into a single location - that could be 4 different partitions, a bunch of
> > subvolumes, or some dire
On Tuesday 22 October 2024 18:01:55 BST Matt Jolly wrote:
> It should not matter; the virtual root involves bind mounting directories
> into a single location - that could be 4 different partitions, a bunch of
> subvolumes, or some directories scattered across a single partition, or
> some combinat
It should not matter; the virtual root involves bind mounting directories into a single location - that could be 4 different partitions, a bunch of subvolumes, or some directories scattered across a single partition, or some combination of those options.Cheers,MattOn 22 Oct 2024 23:36, Michael wro
On Tuesday 22 October 2024 13:00:14 BST Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 October 2024 10:14:48 BST Michael wrote:
> > On Tuesday 22 October 2024 02:10:45 BST Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > On Monday 21 October 2024 09:22:37 BST Michael wrote:
> > > > Assuming all required directories are on the s
On Tuesday 22 October 2024 10:14:48 BST Michael wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 October 2024 02:10:45 BST Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > On Monday 21 October 2024 09:22:37 BST Michael wrote:
> > > Assuming all required directories are on the same fs, what happens if
> > > you
> > > *only* export the parent direc
On Tuesday 22 October 2024 02:10:45 BST Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Monday 21 October 2024 09:22:37 BST Michael wrote:
> > Assuming all required directories are on the same fs, what happens if you
> > *only* export the parent directory? Something like this:
> >
> > /mnt/nfs \
> > 192.168.178.7/32(
On Monday 21 October 2024 09:22:37 BST Michael wrote:
> Assuming all required directories are on the same fs, what happens if you
> *only* export the parent directory? Something like this:
>
> /mnt/nfs \
> 192.168.178.7/32(rw,sync,insecure,no_subtree_check,all_squash,anonuid=250,an
> ongid=250)
On Monday 21 October 2024 03:12:23 BST Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Friday 18 October 2024 15:55:19 BST Michael wrote:
>
> --->8
>
> > exportfs -rav
>
> Ah! I knew about 'exportfs -r' but not the 'av'. When I added that I got
> this:
>
> exportfs: duplicated export entries:
> exportfs:
> :1
On 21/10/24 10:12, Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Friday 18 October 2024 15:55:19 BST Michael wrote:
--->8
exportfs -rav
Ah! I knew about 'exportfs -r' but not the 'av'. When I added that I got this:
exportfs: duplicated export entries:
exportfs:
:192.168.178.7(rw,sync,insecure,no_subtree
On Friday 18 October 2024 15:55:19 BST Michael wrote:
--->8
> exportfs -rav
Ah! I knew about 'exportfs -r' but not the 'av'. When I added that I got this:
exportfs: duplicated export entries:
exportfs:
:192.168.178.7(rw,sync,insecure,no_subtree_check,all_squash,anonuid=250,anongid=250)
e
On 10/18/24 9:41 AM, Peter Humphrey wrote:
Greetings,
Let me try this again.
Why should an NFS server wait 15 seconds before reporting "No such file or
directory"?
Are there any errors in the log on the server? Increasing the verbosity
of the log there might be informative.
On Friday 18 October 2024 14:41:03 BST Peter Humphrey wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Let me try this again.
>
> Why should an NFS server wait 15 seconds before reporting "No such file or
> directory"?
I couldn't find anything conspicuously wrong in your setup, but I don't have
much in depth experience
Greetings,
Let me try this again.
Why should an NFS server wait 15 seconds before reporting "No such file or
directory"?
--
Regards,
Peter.
Greetings,
It's me again with another tyro problem.
I'm trying to set up my big Ryzen M9 workstation as compute host for my
desktop PC, which is an i5 NUCI. I had the same arrangement working well with
the i5's predecessor, but I can't make it work this time.
The idea is to NFS-export the i5's
On Friday, 20 May 2022 15:35:25 BST Peter Humphrey wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> This machine is a compute-server for other machines on the network, which it
> does by NFS-mounting the portage directories in a chroot. You may remember
> that I've messed about a bit with USE flags and the like, but only
Hello list,
This machine is a compute-server for other machines on the network, which it
does by NFS-mounting the portage directories in a chroot. You may remember
that I've messed about a bit with USE flags and the like, but only on this
machine, the compute server and NFS client. The other ma
On Tuesday, 10 March 2020 09:49:48 GMT Michael wrote:
> I'm glad you got it going. I don't use NFS at the moment, but with a fleet
> of ancient systems hanging around I may start doing this soon to accelerate
> emerges for most of them by using a faster PC.
Well, I haven't got that far yet becau
On Tuesday, 10 March 2020 09:43:18 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Tuesday, 10 March 2020 09:27:54 GMT Michael wrote:
> > mount -t nfs 192.168.1.4:portage /mnt/clrn/usr/portage
> >
> > or
> >
> > mount -t nfs 192.168.1.4:/portage /mnt/clrn/usr/portage
>
> Well, even after all the times I read th
On Tuesday, 10 March 2020 09:27:54 GMT Michael wrote:
> On Tuesday, 10 March 2020 08:17:41 GMT netfab wrote:
> > Le 09/03/20 à 17:03, Peter Humphrey a tapoté :
> > > mount -t nfs 192.168.1.4:/mnt/nfs/portage /mnt/clrn/usr/portage #
> > > script on the client
> > >
> > > Result:
> > > * Mounting ch
On Tuesday, 10 March 2020 08:17:41 GMT netfab wrote:
> Le 09/03/20 à 17:03, Peter Humphrey a tapoté :
> > mount -t nfs 192.168.1.4:/mnt/nfs/portage /mnt/clrn/usr/portage #
> > script on the client
> >
> > Result:
> > * Mounting chroot dirs under /mnt/clrn ...
> > mount.nfs: mounting 192.168.1.4:/m
Le 09/03/20 à 17:03, Peter Humphrey a tapoté :
> mount -t nfs 192.168.1.4:/mnt/nfs/portage /mnt/clrn/usr/portage #
> script on the client
>
> Result:
> * Mounting chroot dirs under /mnt/clrn ...
> mount.nfs: mounting 192.168.1.4:/mnt/nfs/portage failed, reason given
> by server: No such file or di
Hello list,
I decided to have another go at fixing my nfs setup. The host 192.168.1.4
exports its portage directory to this host, 192.168.1.5. I used to use nfs-v3
for this, but it wasn't working right so I'm trying with v4.
The problem is that, every time I tell this machine to mount the remote
On 30/12/19 19:18, Daniel Frey wrote:
> 2. On all NFS clients, including the NFS server which mounted other NFS
> mounts, all NFS client options had to be selected or the mount would
> fail. It didn't matter specifying nfsvers=4.0 as a mount option, it
> failed if there was no NFS client kernel sup
On Monday, 30 December 2019 19:18:47 GMT Daniel Frey wrote:
> On 2019-12-30 09:04, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > Is anyone feeling less clueless than me? I'm out of ideas now and hoping
> > for some help.
>
> I set up a new NFS server in the last weeks or so and had this weird
> problem where I couldn
On 2019-12-30 09:04, Peter Humphrey wrote:
Is anyone feeling less clueless than me? I'm out of ideas now and hoping for
some help.
I set up a new NFS server in the last weeks or so and had this weird
problem where I couldn't most an NFSv4 export on clients.
After a lot of head scratching,
On Monday, 23 December 2019 16:50:58 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> Since I set up IPv6 on my LAN, I've been unable to NFS-export a directory on
> machine A (an Atom serving portage via git, among other things) and mount
> it on machine B (this workstation). It was working fine until
On 12/24/19 11:27 AM, Daniel Frey wrote:
On 2019-12-24 02:17, Mick wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 December 2019 09:03:44 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 December 2019 06:11:12 GMT J. Roeleveld wrote:
What happens when you remove the IPv6 adresses from the NFS config?
As you
are using IPv4, th
On Tuesday, 24 December 2019 06:11:12 GMT J. Roeleveld wrote:
> What happens when you remove the IPv6 adresses from the NFS config? As you
> are using IPv4, those should not be needed.
After losing my little server I decided to recommission another box I had
handy. It's a four-core, 64-bit Celero
Mick wrote :
> On Tuesday, 24 December 2019 09:03:44 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 24 December 2019 06:11:12 GMT J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > > What happens when you remove the IPv6 adresses from the NFS config? As
> you
> > > are using IPv4, those should not be needed.
> > >
> > > I have
On 2019-12-24 02:17, Mick wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 December 2019 09:03:44 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 December 2019 06:11:12 GMT J. Roeleveld wrote:
What happens when you remove the IPv6 adresses from the NFS config? As you
are using IPv4, those should not be needed.
I haven't had ti
On Tuesday, 24 December 2019 09:03:44 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Tuesday, 24 December 2019 06:11:12 GMT J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > What happens when you remove the IPv6 adresses from the NFS config? As you
> > are using IPv4, those should not be needed.
> >
> > I haven't had time to enable IPv6 y
On Tuesday, 24 December 2019 06:11:12 GMT J. Roeleveld wrote:
> What happens when you remove the IPv6 adresses from the NFS config? As you
> are using IPv4, those should not be needed.
>
> I haven't had time to enable IPv6 yet, so can't check locally what works and
> what doesn't.
Well, wouldn't
What happens when you remove the IPv6 adresses from the NFS config? As you are
using IPv4, those should not be needed.
I haven't had time to enable IPv6 yet, so can't check locally what works and
what doesn't.
On 23 December 2019 17:50:58 CET, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>Hello list,
>
>Since I set
Hello list,
Since I set up IPv6 on my LAN, I've been unable to NFS-export a directory on
machine A (an Atom serving portage via git, among other things) and mount it
on machine B (this workstation). It was working fine until then, but now mount
commands fail. In both kernels I have NFSv4 selected,
On Sunday, 18 August 2019 10:35:36 BST Adam Carter wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 7:11 PM Peter Humphrey
>
> wrote:
> > On Sunday, 18 August 2019 09:30:36 BST Adam Carter wrote:
> > > Is the output of 'mount | grep nfs' the same on the two client
> > > machines?
> >
> > $ mount | grep nfs
>
On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 7:11 PM Peter Humphrey
wrote:
> On Sunday, 18 August 2019 09:30:36 BST Adam Carter wrote:
>
> > Is the output of 'mount | grep nfs' the same on the two client machines?
>
> $ mount | grep nfs
> nfsd on /proc/fs/nfsd type nfsd (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime)
>
>
nfs4 req
On Sunday, 18 August 2019 09:30:36 BST Adam Carter wrote:
> Is the output of 'mount | grep nfs' the same on the two client machines?
$ mount | grep nfs
nfsd on /proc/fs/nfsd type nfsd (rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime)
It's the same on both clients.
In the chroots, I see:
atom / # mount | grep
On 18 August 2019 10:01:18 CEST, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>On to the next problem...
>
>This workstation serves as compute host to two smaller boxes on the
>network. I
>NFS-mount the PORTDIR of the smaller box in a chroot on this one, then
>do
>emerging and so on to build packages which I install l
On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 6:01 PM Peter Humphrey
wrote:
> On to the next problem...
>
> This workstation serves as compute host to two smaller boxes on the
> network. I
> NFS-mount the PORTDIR of the smaller box in a chroot on this one, then do
> emerging and so on to build packages which I install
On to the next problem...
This workstation serves as compute host to two smaller boxes on the network. I
NFS-mount the PORTDIR of the smaller box in a chroot on this one, then do
emerging and so on to build packages which I install later on the smaller box.
That works fine on one of the smaller
For anyone following or just plain interested, I've solved the issue with
diskless root over NFS not being able to resume correctly after suspending.
nfsvers=4.0 on the boot line
Using 4.2 has speed improvements but results in hardlocking on wakeup.
Thank you to everyone that got involved, seei
On 12/06/18 09:44, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Wols Lists wrote:
>
>> On 11/06/18 09:54, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>> Well, "Windows ACLs" is the only ACL system that is standardized (as part
>>> of
>>> the NFSv4 standard). The old proposal in POSIX.1e from 1993 from Sun has
>>> been
>>> withdrawn
Wols Lists wrote:
> On 11/06/18 09:54, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > Well, "Windows ACLs" is the only ACL system that is standardized (as part
> > of
> > the NFSv4 standard). The old proposal in POSIX.1e from 1993 from Sun has
> > been
> > withdrawn in 1997 since the customers did not like it.
>
On 11/06/18 09:54, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Wol's lists wrote:
>
>> On 09/06/18 18:09, Rich Freeman wrote:
> ...
>>> downsides as well, in particular it is certainly more complex and at
>>> work we practically forbid any kind of windows ACLs at anything other
>>> than the top mount level because
Wol's lists wrote:
> On 09/06/18 18:09, Rich Freeman wrote:
...
> > downsides as well, in particular it is certainly more complex and at
> > work we practically forbid any kind of windows ACLs at anything other
> > than the top mount level because it is so hard to control.
>
> Windows is better t
On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 4:31 PM Wol's lists wrote:
>
> On 09/06/18 18:09, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > I feel like this is something that Windows natively gets "better" than
> > POSIX. They have a concept of UIDs being specific to a machine or
> > authentication server (or domain as they call it), and
On June 9, 2018 1:20:14 PM UTC, Tom H wrote:
>On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 6:43 AM Ian Zimmerman
>wrote:
>>
>> Is there _any_ way around the need to keep the user IDs matched on
>NFS
>> clients and servers?
>
>You have to use NIS, NIS+Kerberos, or LDAP+Kerberos.
>
>I've never tried it but "/etc/idmapd.
On 09/06/18 18:09, Rich Freeman wrote:
I feel like this is something that Windows natively gets "better" than
POSIX. They have a concept of UIDs being specific to a machine or
authentication server (or domain as they call it), and this concept is
enforced at the host level. That said, I'm sure
On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 12:34 PM Grant Taylor
wrote:
>
> NFS will quite happily work with dissimilar IDs if you're using "other"
> permission to access everything. }:-)
>
There are a few network filesystems with this property. As long as
you just mount the whole filesystem with one user/group an
On 06/08/2018 10:42 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
Is there _any_ way around the need to keep the user IDs matched on NFS
clients and servers?
I can argue that the IDs don't have to be synchronized to use NFS. You
just end up with unexpected complications from different IDs on
different systems.
On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 6:43 AM Ian Zimmerman wrote:
>
> Is there _any_ way around the need to keep the user IDs matched on NFS
> clients and servers?
You have to use NIS, NIS+Kerberos, or LDAP+Kerberos.
I've never tried it but "/etc/idmapd.conf" has a "[Static]" section in
which you can set up a
On Saturday, June 9, 2018 6:42:56 AM CEST Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> Is there _any_ way around the need to keep the user IDs matched on NFS
> clients and servers?
Not to my knowledge.
I use OpenLDAP for my users and groups and this has worked perfectly ever
since I implemented it.
> Or, is there any
On 2018-06-09 09:41, Andrew Udvare wrote:
On 2018-06-09, at 00:42, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
Is there _any_ way around the need to keep the user IDs matched on NFS
clients and servers?
I checked and there is no way. It is recommended UID/GID be synced
regularly on all client machines.
NFSv4 requi
> On 2018-06-09, at 00:42, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
>
> Is there _any_ way around the need to keep the user IDs matched on NFS
> clients and servers?
I checked and there is no way. It is recommended UID/GID be synced regularly on
all client machines.
NFSv4 requires user names and group names be
On 09/06/18 05:42, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> Is there _any_ way around the need to keep the user IDs matched on NFS
> clients and servers?
>
> Or, is there any other remote filesystem (other than the one originally
> made by Microsoft) that avoids that chore?
Which filesystem do you mean? Do you mea
Is there _any_ way around the need to keep the user IDs matched on NFS
clients and servers?
Or, is there any other remote filesystem (other than the one originally
made by Microsoft) that avoids that chore?
This is the main reason I have mostly stayed away from NFS all these
years. Recently sshf
On Tuesday 16 May 2017 14:52:49 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 16 May 2017 13:37:15 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > Today I was offered an update of net-fs/nfs-utils from 1.3.4 to
> > 1.3.4-r1. It won't compile, complaining that there's no Kerberos v5
> > with GSS: "consider --disable-gss or --wit
On Tue, 16 May 2017 13:37:15 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> Today I was offered an update of net-fs/nfs-utils from 1.3.4 to
> 1.3.4-r1. It won't compile, complaining that there's no Kerberos v5
> with GSS: "consider --disable-gss or --with-krb5=". But there's no
> Kerberos here and it's not in my
Hello list,
Today I was offered an update of net-fs/nfs-utils from 1.3.4 to 1.3.4-r1. It
won't compile, complaining that there's no Kerberos v5 with GSS: "consider
--disable-gss or --with-krb5=". But there's no Kerberos here and it's not in
my USE flags, and if I specify USE=-kerberos on the co
During a routine update, emerge failed to compile nfs-utils:
[...]
context.c:40:26: fatal error: rpc/auth_gss.h: No such file or directory
#include
^
compilation terminated.
make[2]: *** [Makefile:660: gssd-context.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfini
oh, I guess I have to let it be!
Thanks.
On Tuesday 29 July 2014 12:19:14 behrouz khosravi wrote:
> oh my bad!
> Believe me, I did an honest mistake! and I am very sorry for that.
> Thanks for you help and again, may apologies.
>
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Jul 2014 19:59:16 +0430, behrouz khos
oh my bad!
Believe me, I did an honest mistake! and I am very sorry for that.
Thanks for you help and again, may apologies.
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2014 19:59:16 +0430, behrouz khosravi wrote:
>
> > I was wondering that is it possible to make porta
On Mon, 28 Jul 2014 19:59:16 +0430, behrouz khosravi wrote:
> I was wondering that is it possible to make portage to sync a only a
> subset of portage tree. For example I have not installed Gnome and I
> dont want to sysc command download ebuilds related to this branch.
Please do not top-post
Ple
Hello every body.
I was wondering that is it possible to make portage to sync a only a subset
of portage tree. For example I have not installed Gnome and I dont want to
sysc command download ebuilds related to this branch.
thanks
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 6:28 PM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On Sunday,
On Sunday, July 27, 2014 08:44:02 PM Kerin Millar wrote:
> On 27/07/2014 17:55, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > On 27 July 2014 18:25:24 CEST, "Stefan G. Weichinger"
wrote:
> >> Am 26.07.2014 04:47, schrieb walt:
> >>> So, why did the "broken" machine work normally for more than a year
> >>> without rpcb
On 27/07/2014 17:55, J. Roeleveld wrote:
On 27 July 2014 18:25:24 CEST, "Stefan G. Weichinger" wrote:
Am 26.07.2014 04:47, schrieb walt:
So, why did the "broken" machine work normally for more than a year
without rpcbind until two days ago? (I suppose because nfs-utils was
updated to 1.3.0 ?
Am 27.07.2014 18:25, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
> Only last week I re-attacked this topic as I start using puppet here to
> manage my systems ... and one part of this might be sharing /usr/portage
> via NFSv4. One client host mounts it without a problem, the thinkpads
> don't do so ... just ano
On 27 July 2014 18:25:24 CEST, "Stefan G. Weichinger" wrote:
>Am 26.07.2014 04:47, schrieb walt:
>
>> So, why did the "broken" machine work normally for more than a year
>> without rpcbind until two days ago? (I suppose because nfs-utils was
>> updated to 1.3.0 ?)
>>
>> The real problem here is
Am 26.07.2014 04:47, schrieb walt:
> So, why did the "broken" machine work normally for more than a year
> without rpcbind until two days ago? (I suppose because nfs-utils was
> updated to 1.3.0 ?)
>
> The real problem here is that I have no idea how NFS works, and each
> new version is more com
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
> NFS uses RPC to do some heavy lifting - I don't know how familiar you
> are with this, so here's the quick version:
>
> When you mount something locally, and need to use the mounted
> filesystem, kernel calls are used to get at the data. Th
On 26/07/2014 04:47, walt wrote:
> In this case, the brain dead sysadmin would be moi :)
>
> For years I've been using NFS to share /usr/portage with all of the
> gentoo machines on my LAN.
>
> Problem: occasionally it stops working for no apparent reason.
>
> Example: two days ago I updated t
In this case, the brain dead sysadmin would be moi :)
For years I've been using NFS to share /usr/portage with all of the
gentoo machines on my LAN.
Problem: occasionally it stops working for no apparent reason.
Example: two days ago I updated two ~amd64 gentoo machines, both of
which have bee
On 2014-01-02 7:48 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2014-01-02 7:38 AM, William Kenworthy wrote:
Try this:
# /etc/conf.d/nfs
Thanks Bill, I will...
But what do I need to restart to test the changes? I'd rather not have
to reboot every time...
Is it just rpcbind? Or do I need to restart nfs/nfsmmou
On 2014-01-02 7:38 AM, William Kenworthy wrote:
Try this:
# /etc/conf.d/nfs
Thanks Bill, I will...
But what do I need to restart to test the changes? I'd rather not have
to reboot every time...
Is it just rpcbind? Or do I need to restart nfs/nfsmmount too? Others?
Thanks... hope I can ge
Try this:
# /etc/conf.d/nfs
# If you wish to set the port numbers for lockd,
# please see /etc/sysctl.conf
# Optional services to include in default `/etc/init.d/nfs start`
# For NFSv4 users, you'll want to add "rpc.idmapd" here.
NFS_NEEDED_SERVICES="rpc.idmapd"
# Number of servers to be starte
No one?
Another reboot, and had to open up OUTGOING port 57212 this time.
Why are the static ports I'm assigning not being used?
On 2013-12-31 8:11 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2013-12-31 7:30 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
I've made the following changes to the following config files:
/etc/conf.d/nfs
O
On 2013-12-31 7:30 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
I've made the following changes to the following config files:
/etc/conf.d/nfs
OPTS_RPC_MOUNTD="-p 32767"
OPTS_RPC_STATD="-p 32765 -o 32766"
I've also changed the lockd ports
/etc/sysctl.conf
# You should compile nfsd into the kernel or add it
# to mo
On 2013-12-30 3:25 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
This is for NFS CLIENT... I'm mounting NFS shares from my remote QNAP
NAS boxes.
I've tried specifying the ports in /etc/conf.d/nfs, and /etc
sysctl.conf, but I must be missing something, because every time I
reboot, some other port comes up being blocke
On 2013-12-30 6:21 PM, Pavel Volkov wrote:
I've tried specifying the ports in /etc/conf.d/nfs, and /etc
>sysctl.conf, but I must be missing something, because every time I
>reboot, some other port comes up being blocked when I try to mount the
>shares...
>
>Anyone? The references I've found are
On Monday 30 December 2013 15:25:02 Tanstaafl wrote:
> Ok, my google-fu has failed me...
>
> I've found a few sites that describe how to set static ports for NFS
> mounting remote shares (I use iptables for both inbound AND outbound,
> and it is the outbound I'm having trouble with).
>
> This is
1 - 100 of 301 matches
Mail list logo
