Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 18 Aug 1999 16:31:03 +0100 (WEST) | From | "T.A. dos Santos" <> | Subject | RE: Linux 2.2.12pre |
| |
Well, there are indeed people who DO use knfsd in production environments, without visible problems. I wouldnt say this three months ago, but now i can. Current knfsd seems to do the job. I believe only performance could be tweaked. Now, i have yet to see a vendor releasing an updated knfsd package. Red Hat has been updating like crazy 6.0, but they dont care about knfsd, and from what i read in redhat mailing list, they dont even know how to support it.
TA
On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Paul Jakma wrote:
> > > Nobody uses the current knfsd in a production environment I think. > > > > > even so, the knfsd tools shipped with RH6 is not comaptible with the more > recent knfsd utils. > > > > However the difference is that once I convert a RAID partition > > > for use with an 2.2.12 kernel, I cannot boot earlier > > kernels anymore, > > > right? Or is that a misconception? That is _bad_ and worse it's > > > all undocumented > > > > once you've booted a latest RAID kernel with old-raid drives you'll know all > about it though, and the conversion thing is pretty explicit. > > > Perhaps the answer is that the next 2.2.x should skip to 2.4 and > > 2.3 should skip to 2.5? It seems clear that moving up the 2.2.x > > series does involve significant changes. > > > > biggest problem imo is the reluctance to patch 2.2 up. before you took it > for granted that every now and then you'd have to update tools along with > the kernel. 2.2 has reversed the trend, and we've got to the situation where > the kernel stuff is way out of date compared to the maintainers patches. So > when the update finally happens it ends up being a big one, and people get > stung. > > I've currently got various nfs, apm and tulip patches to apply when i build > a kernel. Thankfully with 2.2.12 i don't have to apply raid anymore. I also > had alpha patches to apply before 2.2.11. (but i still had to back out one > change...). > > I also use devfs (but let's please not get into that), and would really love > to be able to use LVM on top of RAID, but that needs further patching.. :(. > All in all i spend ~30min applying patches and merging rejects when i build > a kernel. And most are so long standing that in a lot of cases i know the > rejects off by heart. > > So why not be more adventurous with synching the kernel up. Those who want > to be on the edge can update their tools as neccessary, those who want tool > stability can track their distributions update instead. That'd be a lot > better than the current mess of endless patches to patches to ... > > regards, > > paul jakma. > > - > 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.tux.org/lkml/ >
- 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.tux.org/lkml/
| |