lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Aug]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRE: 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 the kernel stuff is way out of date compared to the maintainers patches.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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.052 / U:0.236 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site