From owner-freebsd-current Thu Jul 25 23:13:58 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E626937B400 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2002 23:13:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from glatton.cnchost.com (glatton.cnchost.com [207.155.248.47]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8939D43E31 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2002 23:13:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bakul@bitblocks.com) Received: from bitblocks.com (adsl-209-204-185-216.sonic.net [209.204.185.216]) by glatton.cnchost.com id CAA26408; Fri, 26 Jul 2002 02:13:50 -0400 (EDT) [ConcentricHost SMTP Relay 1.14] Message-ID: <200207260613.CAA26408@glatton.cnchost.com> To: Ian Dowse Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mount_nfs -T breakage In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 26 Jul 2002 01:19:31 BST." <200207260119.aa77821@salmon.maths.tcd.ie> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 23:13:49 -0700 From: Bakul Shah Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Yes, that code is very broken indeed. It probably was supposed to > call __rpc_setconf("udp") and not getnetconfigent("udp"), but that > seems to pick up an ipv6 address. I think the best plan is to go > back to the way that part of the code was before revision 1.10. > > Could you try the following patch? Thank you for the patch! Yes, it works. Right after I sent out my message I tried an almost identical patch which also worked but, as I said I don't understand this code, didn't have time to understand it and my patch seemed a bit hacky so I kept quiet. Actually this whole routine seems hacky -- why look up "udp" when you are told explicitly to use tcp? Oh well, I should keep quiet until I really understand it:-) Thanks again! -- bakul To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message