Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 19:53:50 -0400 From: "Gary Palmer" <gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Dan Swartzendruber <dswartz@druber.com> Cc: Jens Schweikhardt <schweikh@noc.dfn.de>, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: option NFS -- why would I want it? Message-ID: <14406.892943630@gjp.erols.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 18 Apr 1998 11:21:59 EDT." <3.0.5.32.19980418112159.00929940@mail.kersur.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dan Swartzendruber wrote in message ID <3.0.5.32.19980418112159.00929940@mail.kersur.net>: > At 04:57 PM 4/18/98 +0200, Jens Schweikhardt wrote: > >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. You don't get stats from `nfstats' as the LKM can't add to the sysctl OID hierarchy if its demand loaded. It needs to be compiled in to the kernel in order for the NFS stats to be available. Gary -- Gary Palmer FreeBSD Core Team Member FreeBSD: Turning PC's into workstations. See http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/ for info 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?14406.892943630>