Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: RFS? | Date | Sat, 06 Jun 1998 09:44:47 -0600 | From | Tim Wright <> |
| |
> According to Kevin K. Sochacki: > > If I recall correctly RFS only worked in homogeneous environments, as > > opposed to NFS which works in a heterogeneous environments. > > If by "homogeneous" you mean "all UNIX", I recall the same. And I like.
Sorry, but as someone already pointed out, it's worse than this. RFS used to panic when you attempted to use it between big and little endian hosts (specifically an AT&T 3B2 and an x86 PC). It's impossible to use device files correcly/safely, again because endianess means you don't know if your ioctls are the right way around, or if the OS isn't identical, if they even match up. The uid mapping stuff was great for two machines, lousy for ~10, and utterly unmanageable for 100s or 1000s (every machine has to have a mapping file for every other machine with *no* facilities for administration thereof). The list goes on.
Sadly, it's an all too familiar story of something that came out of the AT&T USG. An interesting idea, inadequately thought out and badly implemented. It's like what the USG did to STREAMS (the 8th edition Unix STREAMS are not the baroque mess that was eventually shipped in System V).
I don't know anything about Coda, but it sounds like a much better starting place.
Regards,
Tim
-- Tim Wright | Aracnet -- Portland's loudest electrons timw@aracnet.com OR | Ring +1 503 626.6873 V.34 (28800) 24hrs timw@sequent.com | Browse http://www.aracnet.com for info! "Nobody ever said I was charming, they said "Rimmer, you're a git!"" RD VI
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |