From owner-freebsd-current Fri Apr 18 09:40:16 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA16157 for current-outgoing; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:40:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rocky.mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA16150 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:40:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.mt.sri.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA22251; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 10:40:03 -0600 (MDT) Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 10:40:03 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <199704181640.KAA22251@rocky.mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Doug Rabson Cc: Nate Williams , current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NFS comments In-Reply-To: References: <199704181452.IAA21069@rocky.mt.sri.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.27 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > 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? Nate