From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Nov 23 9:18:19 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D4541534B for ; Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:18:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from semuta.feral.com (semuta [192.67.166.70]) by feral.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA07636; Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:17:46 -0800 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:17:46 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Jacob Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: Warner Losh Cc: "David E. Cross" , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Ok, that's it, enough is enough! (rpc.lockd) In-Reply-To: <199911231701.KAA13906@harmony.village.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > : Ok... I have *had* it with the meta, but not really, lockd. Are there any > : kernel issues with correctly implimenting rpc.lockd? How can I take a > : filehandle and map it into a filename, with path, so I may open it and lock > : it on the server? Are there any protocol specs? I downloaded the RFC for > : version 4 nlm (which we do not supoprt at *all*), but it only lists diffs to > : the version 3 spec, which I cannot find, and the source is not a whole lot > : of help on this issue. > > One area that Solbourne had lots and lots of problems with years ago > when it tried to implenent rpc.lockd was that Sun, at the time, has 5! > incompatible versions that had to be interoperated with. Don't know > if things have changed in the ensuing years or not... Not really, no. Insofar as I know, the only distributed open source lock manager that might ever have a chance of being usable is the one the GFS guys are working on now, and naturally that will be tied to GFS, etc... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message