From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Apr 18 16:54:14 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA29976 for freebsd-stable-outgoing; Sat, 18 Apr 1998 16:54:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gjp.erols.com (alex-va-n008c243.moon.jic.com [206.156.18.253]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA29959 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 1998 23:54:06 GMT (envelope-from gjp@gjp.erols.com) Received: from gjp.erols.com (localhost.erols.com [127.0.0.1]) by gjp.erols.com (8.8.8/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA14410; Sat, 18 Apr 1998 19:53:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from gjp@gjp.erols.com) To: Dan Swartzendruber cc: Jens Schweikhardt , stable@FreeBSD.ORG From: "Gary Palmer" Subject: Re: option NFS -- why would I want it? In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 18 Apr 1998 11:21:59 EDT." <3.0.5.32.19980418112159.00929940@mail.kersur.net> Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 19:53:50 -0400 Message-ID: <14406.892943630@gjp.erols.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk 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