Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:52:11 +0300 From: Andrey Simonenko <simon@comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>, Vincent Hoffman <vince@unsane.co.uk> Subject: Comparison of the nfse compatibility mode with mountd and exports(5) Message-ID: <20120718105211.GA47667@pm513-1.comsys.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <68594395.2439924.1341103989486.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> References: <4FECAD2C.8070402@unsane.co.uk> <68594395.2439924.1341103989486.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 08:53:09PM -0400, 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. Since NFSE was mentioned in this thread and there were some opinions about its compatibility with existent NFS exports configuration, I made comparison of the nfse compatibility mode with mountd and exports(5): http://nfse.sourceforge.net/COMPATIBILITY
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120718105211.GA47667>