Re: nfs in 2.0.33 ?

Peter T. Breuer (ptb@it.uc3m.es)
Wed, 15 Jul 1998 17:55:08 +0200 (MET DST)


"A month of sundays ago DAVID BALAZIC wrote:"
>
>
> [ many lines about nfs deleted ]
>
> >File locking is a side item - knfsd does file locking, unfsd doesnt. Its
> >a seperate and differently broken protocol ;)
>
> So is there a solution or what ?
> Like a "working" network FS ?
> Can I consider coda as a good replacement for nfs ?

I essentially got told to "piss off unless I'm prepared to co-develop"
when I asked that of Peter Braam, the scientist in charge. I'll post
the conversation, if encouraged! I wasn't very amused by the attitude,
but then they are clearly defensive about something, and CMU is not a
hassle-free work environment.

I told them I was interested in using coda as a replacement for nfs, but
that our techs would hardly be able to compile the code. It errors out
at about the third .c file (type of the cpu registers undefined). It
took me about half an hour to compile the 100MB - there are about 5 or
six more touches that have to be made, and then make a good guess at
installing it, following the lead given by the .spec file in the .rpm.
I got a server up, and a client, but the two wouldn't communicate.
None of their installation instructions are consistent. There are no
man pages in man page format. The utilities they say to use don't
exist, are called differently in the package, or call .tk scripts that
don't exist. I was unimpressed. I told them what I found to be wrong
and asked them to fix these things (documentation, names, tools that
call things that don't exist, and a 1,2,3 for installing a replacement
for a nfs mount, and please, libc 5 binaries and tgz aimed at
/usr/local). In return I got a vaguely hysterical letter saying that
coda was in the same "promising" state as linux was four years ago, and
that they didn't know why I was using libc 5 instead of glibc.

If they don't know, then I don't hold out much hope for coda being a
more robust FS than nfs in the near future.

> Any other alternatives ? ( samba doesn't count , neither does NCPFS , I guess - they are
> not UNIX/Linux-compatible enough )

I'm looking also. I still feel that nfs in 2.0.33 is not quite as
robust as it was in the updated 2.0.25 I was running before. I am making
some tests to see if I can pin down the differences.

> --
> David Balazic , student
> E-mail : 1stein@writeme.com | living in sLOVEnija
> home page: http://surf.to/stein
> Computer: Amiga 1200 + Quantum LPS-340AT

Peter ptb@it.uc3m.es

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html