Paul Jakma wrote:
>
> On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
>
> > escape Linux 2.2.xx NFS. This is kind of serious, you know?
>
> yep. it is serious. we've been begging for knfsd to be updated to the
> most /current/ code for quite a while a now. I searched the archives
> and i found a post of mine asking alan to consider an NFS patch sync
> for 2.2.something - over a year ago.
>
> standard linux NFS is dreadful and unstable, and that's just between
> linux machines. other unixen as clients? don't even try.
I hear that the new NFS patch is "better and more stable" etc. but no
details. It seems to me that if you want an NFS problem fixed in 2.2.x,
address that a single problem with a reproducible test and a small,
focused kernel patch sent to Alan.
Whatever Alan's reasons for not including "the 2.2.x NFS patch", I
serious doubt among those reasons is "keep NFS dreadful and unstable."
;-) Maybe it breaks backwards compatibility... so then, someone should
pick up the ball and break up the NFS patch into acceptable, useful,
tested chunks. Avoid the stuff that breaks backwards compatibility, but
submit the other fixes to Alan, describing in detail each problem fixed
by each patch.
Jeff
-- Jeff Garzik | Isn't it strange that the same people Building 1024 | that laugh at gypsy fortune tellers MandrakeSoft, Inc. | take economists seriously? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 15 2000 - 21:00:15 EST