Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 10:40:03 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFS comments Message-ID: <199704181640.KAA22251@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970418173155.428F-100000@herring.nlsystems.com> References: <199704181452.IAA21069@rocky.mt.sri.com> <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970418173155.428F-100000@herring.nlsystems.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> > I noticed Doug making some fixes in -current for some bugs, do any of > > these also apply to 2.2.1. Also, I think I've figured out why I'm not > > having any NFS problems on my 2.2.1 box. Does NFS default to V3 if I > > use it in /etc/fstab file and the box supports it? My servers are > > solaris 2.5.1 boxes, and I've not had *any* problems whatsoever beating > > them up from FreeBSD clients. Does that ring any bells? > > Some of the kernel fixes are relavent to 2.2 and all the user fixes are > relavent. I was planning to let them soak for a few days in current > before updating the 2.2 branch. Great! > NFS will now default to V3 if not otherwise specified in /etc/fstab (with > my latest change to mount_nfs). Before today, it would use V2 unless the > nfsv3 option was present. So my NFS mounts to the Solaris boxes are using NFS V2 now then since my box is running 2.2.1? Natehome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704181640.KAA22251>