[Petter Reinholdtsen] > We can disable autofs on diskless workstations and use sshfs > instead. The question is, do we want to?
I ran the file system test from <URL:https://github.com/gebi/fs-test>, and got this result: Testing POSIX/Unix sematics on file system info: testing symlink creation info: testing hard link creation error: link() succeeded but link count was not incremented info: testing subdirectory creation info: testing umask effect on file creation error: Wrong file mode 664 when creating using mode 666 and umask 000 info: sqlite worked info: testing fcntl locking Read-locking 1 byte from 1073741824 Read-locking 510 byte from 1073741826 Unlocking 1 byte from 1073741824 Write-locking 1 byte from 1073741824 Write-locking 510 byte from 1073741826 Unlocking 2 byte from 1073741824 So umask and hardlink handling is broken. The umask problem will affect file sharing using NFS on shared directories, while the hardlink issue probably will not affect many programs. Disabling autofs will make it harder to make sure shared directories are mounted on all clients too, so if we drop autofs on diskless workstations, I guess the umask problem matter less than the lack of easy sharing of files. :) -- Happy hacking Petter Reinholdtsen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
