Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 02:55:43 +0300 From: "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru> To: Martin Blapp <mb@imp.ch> Cc: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>, Daniel <freebsd@grunblatt.com.ar>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [FIX] Re: CFS - Portmap Message-ID: <20010323025542.A36278@nagual.pp.ru> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103230045120.17221-100000@levais.imp.ch>; from mb@imp.ch on Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 12:49:33AM %2B0100 References: <200103222342.f2MNgGh76684@mobile.wemm.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103230045120.17221-100000@levais.imp.ch>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 00:49:33 +0100, Martin Blapp wrote: > > > Breaking nfs from working on user defined ports is a step backwards and > > should be fixed. Lots of people run nfsd and cfsd at the same time. > > No, you understand me wrong, the way this is done is bogus. If you set > -DCFS_PORT=3049 like it is done at the moment and use nc instead of NULL > it works. To have a NULL nc entry is not correct in tirpc. So the question is: why cfsd attempts to register with NULL netconfig for ports != 2049? What it wants to obtain by such move? -- Andrey A. Chernov http://ache.pp.ru/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010323025542.A36278>