From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 26 22:49:48 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FB9D106564A; Thu, 26 May 2011 22:49:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rmacklem@uoguelph.ca) Received: from esa-annu.mail.uoguelph.ca (esa-annu.mail.uoguelph.ca [131.104.91.36]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF93C8FC14; Thu, 26 May 2011 22:49:47 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ap0EAMTY3k2DaFvO/2dsb2JhbABUhEmiZIhwq3uQWoErg2qBBwSQOY8s X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,276,1304308800"; d="scan'208";a="122006204" Received: from erie.cs.uoguelph.ca (HELO zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca) ([131.104.91.206]) by esa-annu-pri.mail.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP; 26 May 2011 18:49:47 -0400 Received: from zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zcs3.mail.uoguelph.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FBF9B3E95; Thu, 26 May 2011 18:49:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 18:49:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Rick Macklem To: Andriy Gapon Message-ID: <1737089073.877621.1306450187354.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> In-Reply-To: <4DDEAC20.5010006@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [172.17.91.202] X-Mailer: Zimbra 6.0.10_GA_2692 (ZimbraWebClient - FF3.0 (Win)/6.0.10_GA_2692) Cc: Rick Macklem , FreeBSD-Current Subject: Re: newnfs user setup 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: Thu, 26 May 2011 22:49:48 -0000 > > One thing that initially forgot - what about lockd and statd? > Do I still need them with newnfs and NFSv3 to get fcntl/flock working? > And do those actually work? :-) > Yes, and they haven't changed so they work just like before, which means ymmv when using them. > I understand that with NFSv4 I don't need those anymore. > That is correct. NFSv4 has file locking built in. rick