Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 00:12:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> To: "Andrew P. Lentvorski" <bsder@mail.allcaps.org> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFS lock failure (was Re: FreeBSD 5.0 as a desktop 'failure' report) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0209150012070.86175-100000@beppo> In-Reply-To: <20020914215026.A91907-100000@mail.allcaps.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Huh- that's a good question. I have all of that stuff around and should try it. Last I tried either connectathon or spec, FreeBSD panicd. On Sat, 14 Sep 2002, Andrew P. Lentvorski wrote: > On Sat, 14 Sep 2002, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > ... When the machine > > rebooted (with a newer kernel, hmm) it is now completing the locking > > tests (note the warnings, though). My locking problems with the linux > > server continue though. > > Cool! I'm glad that FreeBSD -current passes the new Connectathon 2002 > locking suites (especially when run by somebody other than me :-) ). > > Your linux problems are not surprising. The linux NFS server did not > support partial file locking last time I checked. It also did not support > certain combinations of rpc binding(portmapper/rpcbind), NFS version, and > NFS lock manager verion. However, NFS on linux is Somebody Else's > Problem(tm). > > The lack of partial file locking was the reason that I rewrote a whole lot > of rpc.lockd on -current. Even after this rewrite, rpc.lockd still has > some quirks on -current which will require some significant kernel > digging to rectify. However, some of this should get easier given the > significant efforts which have gone into the filesystem code in -current. > > -a > > > > 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?Pine.BSF.4.21.0209150012070.86175-100000>