From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 15 14:43:22 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4978F32;
 Fri, 15 Mar 2013 14:43:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigknife-pt.tunnel.tserv9.chi1.ipv6.he.net
 [IPv6:2001:470:1f10:75::2])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4C5D684;
 Fri, 15 Mar 2013 14:43:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.124])
 by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3688FB948;
 Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:43:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: NewNFS vs. oldNFS for 10.0?
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 09:46:28 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.2-CBSD-20110714-p25; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; )
References: <514324E8.30209@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <514324E8.30209@freebsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201303150946.29100.jhb@freebsd.org>
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:43:22 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: rmacklem@uoguelph.ca, Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 14:43:23 -0000

On Friday, March 15, 2013 9:40:56 am Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Hi Rick, all,
> 
> is there a plan to decide for one NFS implementation for FreeBSD 10.0,
> or to keep both around indefinately?
> 
> I'm talking about:
>   oldNFS in sys/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver}     NFSv2+NFSv3
>   newNFS in sys/fs/{nfs, nfsclient, nfsserver}  NFSv2+NFSv3+NFSv4
> 
> NewNFS supports newer NFS standards and seems to have proven itself in
> some quite heavy traffic environments.
> 
> Is there any reason to keep oldNFS around other than nostalgic?

It can probably be removed.  It's kind of handy to keep around as long as 8.x
is around since it uses oldNFS by default as it makes merging bugfixes to the 
NFS client a bit easier (you fix both clients in HEAD and can then just svn
merge both of those to 8 and 9).  Having several fixes to the NFS client 
recently and being in a position of still using 8.x with oldNFS in production, 
I would prefer to not remove it quite yet.

-- 
John Baldwin