From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 30 19:22:55 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 828A81065673 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 19:22:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) Received: from esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca (esa-jnhn.mail.uoguelph.ca [131.104.91.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D20D8FC15 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 19:22:54 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ap8EAE28P1CDaFvO/2dsb2JhbABCAw6FdrYUgiABAQEEAQEBICsgCxsOCgICDRkCKQEJJgYIBwQBHASHbAupEJJ3gSGKAYMegg+BEgOTK4IsgRSPBYIpVoFF X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,342,1344225600"; d="scan'208";a="177199960" Received: from erie.cs.uoguelph.ca (HELO zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca) ([131.104.91.206]) by esa-jnhn-pri.mail.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP; 30 Aug 2012 15:22:48 -0400 Received: from zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FA28B40EA; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 15:22:48 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 15:22:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Rick Macklem To: Tim Gustafson Message-ID: <951954369.1342002.1346354568372.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [172.17.91.202] X-Mailer: Zimbra 6.0.10_GA_2692 (ZimbraWebClient - FF3.0 (Win)/6.0.10_GA_2692) Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Using AMD with NFS Mounts X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 19:22:55 -0000 Tim Gustafson wrote: > > I would miss AMD things like type:=link and normalize_hostnames for > > preventing duplicate mounts of the same resource. > > I don't think anyone is suggesting we deprecate AMD. I'd just like to > have autofs as an option. > Although I'd see it as an option initially, planning on supporting both "forever" would just result in bloat and yet more software to try and maintain, imho. (Theoretical comment, at least until a solid autofs port exists.) rick > -- > > Tim Gustafson > tjg@soe.ucsc.edu > 831-459-5354 > Baskin Engineering, Room 313A > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"