From owner-freebsd-questions  Sat Apr 15 11:36:36 1995
Return-Path: questions-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id LAA19820
          for questions-outgoing; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 11:36:36 -0700
Received: from halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu (halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.159])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id LAA19808
          for <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 11:36:30 -0700
Received: by halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu; id AA11786; Sat, 15 Apr 1995 14:36:27 -0400
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 1995 14:36:27 -0400
From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-Id: <9504151836.AA11786@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu>
To: Brian Tao <taob@aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw>
Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Processes not dying! 
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.91.950415020833.191E-100000@aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw>
References: <Pine.BSF.3.91.950414090033.14236A-100000@ain.charm.net>
	<Pine.BSI.3.91.950415020833.191E-100000@aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw>
Sender: questions-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

<<On Sat, 15 Apr 1995 02:10:42 +0800 (CST), Brian Tao <taob@aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw> said:

>     Doesn't wuarchive suggest soft, interruptible mounts for exactly
> this reason?  On that subject, is there any disadvantage to mounting
> NFS drives soft,intr?  Could be make mount_nfs default to these two
> options, or would that be going against some long-standing UNIX
> tradition?

`soft,intr' breaks traditional UNIX filesystem semantics even more
than regular NFS does.

-GAWollman

--
Garrett A. Wollman   | Shashish is simple, it's discreet, it's brief. ... 
wollman@lcs.mit.edu  | Shashish is the bonding of hearts in spite of distance.
Opinions not those of| It is a bond more powerful than absence.  We like people
MIT, LCS, ANA, or NSA| who like Shashish.  - Claude McKenzie + Florent Vollant