From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jul 19 22:33:16 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mail.gnf.org (firewall.gnf.org [208.44.31.34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9AA237B406 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:33:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gordont@gnf.org) Received: by mail.gnf.org (Postfix, from userid 888) id 7A41611E50F; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:28:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.gnf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 787E811A56A; Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:28:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 22:28:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Gordon Tetlow To: Matthew Jacob Cc: Ian Dowse , Subject: Re: Default retry behaviour for mount_nfs In-Reply-To: <20010719181731.O50024-100000@wonky.feral.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > > So the question is - should I keep the new behaviour that is probably > > a better default and will catch out fewer new users but may surprise > > some experienced users, or should I revert to the traditional > > default where `-R1' or `-b' are required to avoid boot-time hangs? > > > > Sorry- let me be clearer: > > FWIW, I vote that we rever to the traditional default and require -R1 or -b to > avoid boot time hangs. The standard behaviour for most NFS implementations > that I'm aware of would do this. I was playing with a RedHat 7.1 box (kernel 2.4.x) and it continued along after it failed to mount and NFS server. I personally think the non-blocking behavior is better. -gordon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message