Date: 25 Aug 1999 03:35:10 -0000 From: vladimir@math.uic.edu To: bright@rush.net Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFSv3 on freebsd<-->solaris Message-ID: <19990825033510.26002.qmail@math.uic.edu>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From bright@rush.net Wed Aug 25 01:11:10 1999 >Delivered-To: vladimir@mailhost2.math.uic.edu >Delivered-To: vladimir@math.uic.edu >Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 21:21:27 -0400 (EDT) >From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@rush.net> >To: vladimir@math.uic.edu >cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Re: NFSv3 on freebsd<-->solaris >MIME-Version: 1.0 > >On 24 Aug 1999 vladimir@math.uic.edu wrote: > >> Following advice from Cejka Rudolf <cejkar@dcse.fee.vutbr.cz>, I have edited >> /src/sys/nfs/nfs_syscalls.c (commented out the lines after the "Solaris 2.5" >> comment). The "File exists" errors went away, everything seemed normal, >> but then I ran into another problem. mailx on solaris >> client could not lock the mailbox file anymore. The snoop output is >> below (I am not an NFS guru, but hope it will be useful to somebody). >> Here galileo is the FBSD server, galois is a Solaris 7 NFS client. >> Why would solaris machine make a request with vers=4: >> galois.math.uic.edu -> galileo.math.uic.edu PORTMAP C GETPORT prog=100021 (NLM) vers=4 proto=UDP >> ? >> (am I right that vers here is the same as the NFS version)? > >The NLM version 4 protocol is not supported, I am working on this. > >Question: did you delete both checks after the Solaris 2.5 mention? >or just one? which one? > >-Alfred > > Ah, so vers=4 has nothing to do with NFS's vers 3. I have deleted both checks. Please let me know if you need more info or testing done. Vladimir 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?19990825033510.26002.qmail>