From owner-freebsd-current Tue Aug 24 18:15:38 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from cygnus.rush.net (cygnus.rush.net [209.45.245.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84C0815145 for ; Tue, 24 Aug 1999 18:15:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@rush.net) Received: from localhost (bright@localhost) by cygnus.rush.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id VAA25664; Tue, 24 Aug 1999 21:21:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 21:21:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Alfred Perlstein To: vladimir@math.uic.edu Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: NFSv3 on freebsd<-->solaris In-Reply-To: <19990824181040.4491.qmail@math.uic.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 24 Aug 1999 vladimir@math.uic.edu wrote: > Following advice from Cejka Rudolf , I have edited > /src/sys/nfs/nfs_syscalls.c (commented out the lines after the "Solaris 2.5" > comment). The "File exists" errors went away, everything seemed normal, > but then I ran into another problem. mailx on solaris > client could not lock the mailbox file anymore. The snoop output is > below (I am not an NFS guru, but hope it will be useful to somebody). > Here galileo is the FBSD server, galois is a Solaris 7 NFS client. > Why would solaris machine make a request with vers=4: > galois.math.uic.edu -> galileo.math.uic.edu PORTMAP C GETPORT prog=100021 (NLM) vers=4 proto=UDP > ? > (am I right that vers here is the same as the NFS version)? The NLM version 4 protocol is not supported, I am working on this. Question: did you delete both checks after the Solaris 2.5 mention? or just one? which one? -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message