[lkml]   [2000]   [Jan]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [NFS] NLM4 patches for 2.2.13
> Saadia Khan wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have put up two more patches for nfsd3 and nlm4 support for 2.2.13 at
> >
> >
> > nfsd3_nlm4_2.2.13.patch is for nfsd and nlm4 support based on Allen Morris's
> > work along with nlm4 support.
> > nlm4_linux2.2.13.patch is for just the nlm4 stuff.
> So now it seems we have TWO different NFS3 knfsd server implementations: this
> one and Neil Brown's??

The nfsd3_nlm4_2.2.13.patch is a continuation of the nfsd3_2.2.10.patch which
I put out earlier, ie for the 2.2.13 tree. Since I had already built the
patch when Neil Brown's patch came out I put it out too, which was probably
not the right thing to do since that work is now obsolete, sorry about that.

The nlm4_linux2.2.13.patch contains the NLM4 server support not present in
Neil Brown's patch and can be applied after applying his server patch.

Sorry about the miscommunication.


> Guys, this is hopeless! The status of Linux NFS is already greatly confused
> and this just makes it worse. Could the various knfsd developers/owners
> PLEASE get together and agree on what is to be the official version going
> forward?
> >From a brief look at the code, I see that the nfsd3_nlm4_2.2.13.patch still
> has the old nfsfh.c code which leads to the infamous "Security: /// bad export"
> bug, whereas Neil Brown's version has a major cleanup of this. So in that
> respect at least, the Neil B. version seems more advanced...
> I will try to do some testing over the next few days: but it would really help
> if the developers could come to a concensus: the existence of "duelling
> versions" is bad for everyone...
> Dave Higgen

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean