On Nov 6, 2007, at 8:53 PM EST, Dan Halbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greg Earle wrote: >> We use NIS for our maps, but just for fun, I decided to test >> turning "--ghost" *on* (we default to it off, and we also use >> "-nobrowse" on our Suns, so we like to keep them consistent), >> and ... >> > Greg, try the latest kernel, 2.6.9-55.0.12, which is now available > from > RedHat and has also gone downstream to various other RH-source-based > distributions. This works for us. I agree your ghost/non-ghost > differences are odd and do not match my experience. But I see > differences also based on client load. I see that Red Hat just announced/released RHEL 4 Update 6 yesterday: https://www.redhat.com/archives/nahant-list/2007-November/msg00068.html It appears that this includes kernel 2.6.9-67. Can I safely assume that this new release quashes this pesky ENOENT bug once and for all? More interestingly/importantly, RHEL 4 Update 6 includes autofs5 as a "Technology Preview". How does the autofs5 code in this new release compare with the mainline code in RHEL 5 Update 1, and is it considered robust enough to use in a production environment that depends heavily (as in, "life or death" - we use the automounter for *everything*) on automounting? We started our RHEL 4 Update 5 upgrade cycle a month and a half ago but were stopped dead in our tracks by this bug. Now that we have a workaround ("--ghost"), we are planning on pushing ahead, but I need to know whether I should try recommending that we instead move to Update 6 rather than continue to use Update 5 with a Band-Aid. Thanks, - Greg _______________________________________________ autofs mailing list [email protected] http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/autofs
