On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 18:05, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> I am, however, surprised when you say that Solaris has problems with
> this. The PROG_MISMATCH error does also tell the client the minimum and
> maximum supported version, so if all is working well, then it recognize
> that we support version 3
on den 16.02.2005 Klokka 17:17 (+0100) skreiv Andreas Gruenbacher:
> On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 18:29, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > lau den 22.01.2005 Klokka 21:34 (+0100) skreiv Andreas Gruenbacher:
> > > Solaris nfsacl workaround
> >
> > NACK. No hacks.
>
> Well, I'm not in the position to fix Solaris
On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 18:29, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> lau den 22.01.2005 Klokka 21:34 (+0100) skreiv Andreas Gruenbacher:
> > Solaris nfsacl workaround
>
> NACK. No hacks.
Well, I'm not in the position to fix Solaris. It would be possible to
implement NFSACL for NFSv2 (Solaris has it), but I doub
On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 06:37:19PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> on den 16.02.2005 Klokka 00:02 (+0100) skreiv Olivier Galibert:
>
> > Resolving the problem and/or cleaning the code, no. Telling what kind
> > of patch would be acceptable is your responsability, yes.
>
> Read the patch, read th
on den 16.02.2005 Klokka 00:02 (+0100) skreiv Olivier Galibert:
> Resolving the problem and/or cleaning the code, no. Telling what kind
> of patch would be acceptable is your responsability, yes.
Read the patch, read the earlier patch [2/13] in which the same hack
appeared in the client code, an
On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 05:43:24PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> ty den 15.02.2005 Klokka 21:35 (+0100) skreiv Olivier Galibert:
> > That's the second time I see you refusing an interoperability patch
> > without bothering to say what would be acceptable. Do we need a fork
> > between knfsd-pure
ty den 15.02.2005 Klokka 21:35 (+0100) skreiv Olivier Galibert:
> That's the second time I see you refusing an interoperability patch
> without bothering to say what would be acceptable. Do we need a fork
> between knfsd-pure and knfsd-actually-works-in-the-real-world or what?
You appear to be un
On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 12:29:06PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> lau den 22.01.2005 Klokka 21:34 (+0100) skreiv Andreas Gruenbacher:
> > Solaris nfsacl workaround
>
> NACK. No hacks.
That's the second time I see you refusing an interoperability patch
without bothering to say what would be accep
lau den 22.01.2005 Klokka 21:34 (+0100) skreiv Andreas Gruenbacher:
> Solaris nfsacl workaround
NACK. No hacks.
Trond
--
Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo in
If the nfs_acl program is available, Solaris clients expect both
version 2 and version 3 to be available; RPC_PROG_MISMATCH leads to a
mount failure. Fake RPC_PROG_UNAVAIL when asked for nfs_acl version 2.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Gruenbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Olaf Kirch <[EMAIL PRO
10 matches
Mail list logo
