On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 04:43:28PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, Rick Macklem wrote:
> > Someone just pinged me on this and I figured I should bring it up.
> > 1 - Is anyone out there still using oldnfs due to unresolved
> > problems with the new one? (I am not aware of any outstanding
> > issues in the new nfs that don't exist in the oldnfs.)
> > 2 - Does anyone see a problem with getting rid of oldnfs for
> > FreebSD-11?
> > 3 - If I get rid of it in -head, I can do it either in mid-December
> > or mid-April. (I can't do commits during the winter.)
> > Does anyone have a rough idea when the 11.0 release cycle will
> > start, so I can choose which of the above would be preferable?
> > (I figured I'd wait until after the last 10.n release that happens
> > before 11.0, since it will be easier to MFC before the removal of
> > oldnfs.)
> > Thanks in advance for any comments, rick
> > ps: John, I've cc'd you since I thought you are the guy most likely to
> > need to do commits/MFCs to oldnfs.
> I think removing it is fine, but as early as possible (as John says) to give
> our -CURRENT users time to stop working around bugs and start reporting them
I remember the main reason for keeping oldnfs, both server and client,
around in HEAD was to facilitate MFC of fixes to the branches which
still use oldnfs, i.e. stable/8. If this reason is still valid, oldnfs
have to stay in HEAD till stable/8 is supported or interested for
I usually do not like direct commits into the stable branches.
Otherwise, I see no reason to keep oldnfs around.
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"