Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 20:37:24 +1000 From: Tim Robbins <tjr@freebsd.org> To: Paul Seniura <pdseniura@techie.com> Cc: Lukas Ertl <le@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Q's about IBM TSM (was Re: HEADSUP: ibcs2 and svr4 compat headedfor history) Message-ID: <20040629103724.GA25753@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> In-Reply-To: <20040628215640.C14935C29@techpc04.okladot.state.ok.us> References: <20040628212811.W658@korben.in.tern> <20040628215640.C14935C29@techpc04.okladot.state.ok.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 04:56:40PM -0500, Paul Seniura wrote: > I google'd and didn't like what I saw. Stuff about > nullfs not being too kosher on -Current. :( There seems to be a lot of superstition surrounding nullfs, but I only know of one outstanding reproducible problem with it in -current (sockets and fifos aren't handled correctly and cause panics.) If you can spare the time to experiment, I suggest trying it, then filing a PR if you encounter any problems. There's no guarantee that these problems will be addressed right away, but it will give others more solid information than rumours to go by when deciding whether or not to use nullfs, and well-documented problems are much more likely to get fixed. Tim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040629103724.GA25753>