From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 2 14:15:35 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 436BB106564A for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 14:15:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vince@unsane.co.uk) Received: from unsane.co.uk (unsane-pt.tunnel.tserv5.lon1.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f08:110::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB1B48FC12 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2012 14:15:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vhoffman.lon.namesco.net (lon.namesco.net [195.7.254.102]) (authenticated bits=0) by unsane.co.uk (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q62EF6iY056865 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 2 Jul 2012 15:15:07 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from vince@unsane.co.uk) Message-ID: <4FF1ACEA.3080009@unsane.co.uk> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 15:15:06 +0100 From: Vincent Hoffman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrey Simonenko References: <68594395.2439924.1341103989486.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> <4FF030DA.8030304@unsane.co.uk> <20120702120509.GA24501@pm513-1.comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <20120702120509.GA24501@pm513-1.comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Rick Macklem , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Occassional "permission denied" in the middle of a large transfer over NFS X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 14:15:35 -0000 On 02/07/2012 13:05, Andrey Simonenko wrote: > On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 12:13:30PM +0100, Vincent Hoffman wrote: >> On 01/07/2012 01:53, Rick Macklem wrote: >>> I haven't looked at Andrey's patch, but conceptually it sounds like >>> the best approach. As I understand it, the problem with replacing >>> mountd with nfse (at least in the FreeBSD source tree) is that nfse >>> is not 100% backwards compatible with /etc/exports and, as such, is >>> a POLA violation. >> Understood. Its far from a simple drop in replacement. > List of difference between "nfse -C ..." (compatible mode with mountd) > and mountd is given here: > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs/2012-June/014554.html > > If we ignore absence of some obsolete options support and some command > line options, the rest of differences visible to a user will occur only > if one does not follow rules of exports(5) file format. > > The native mode of nfse (nfs.exports(5) file format) is different > than the logic of mountd, just because using existent exports(5) file > format it is impossible to specify export of not mounted file system, > it is impossible to specify all export settings for one file system in > one line, etc. > > Can you verify whether nfse compatible mode with mountd is really > compatible with exports(5) files on your systems using instructions > from this message (no installation or patching is required): > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs/2010-May/008421.html Its certainly compatible for me. I only have simple requirements though. (Basic NFS exports for servers to dump their backups onto.) nfse does look very good to me and I'll certainly be trying it in a VM. Any Ideas as to what would be needed to get this imported? Vince