Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 11:21:59 -0400 From: Dan Swartzendruber <dswartz@druber.com> To: Jens Schweikhardt <schweikh@noc.dfn.de> Cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: option NFS -- why would I want it? Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980418112159.00929940@mail.kersur.net> In-Reply-To: <199804181457.QAA12277@obsidian.noc.dfn.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 04:57 PM 4/18/98 +0200, Jens Schweikhardt wrote: > >hello, world\n > >just out of curiosity: when I compile a kernel with option NFS the >size increases by 250k (on an i486, 2.2.5R): > >-r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 886718 Apr 16 14:25 kernel >-r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 1125987 Apr 16 13:14 kernel+NFS > >However, even without option NFS in the kernel, I can use all >NFS stuff, like mounting nfs file systems, use the automounter >and so on. The machine works both as nfs server and client. > >I do think that 'option NFS' is there for a reason. The only reason >I can think of right now is that I need nfs in the kernel if the >machine is diskless. Is there another catch? Not that I know of. You are binding NFS into the kernel. If you don't do this, any NFS operations will load the LKM for NFS transparently, so as far I know, there's no compelling reason except diskless operation. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.5.32.19980418112159.00929940>