On Friday, October 24, 2014 04:43:28 PM 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 > :-).
We still use oldnfs at work, even on 11.x, but I'm very much in favor of getting back to one single copy. It seems like there's too many things that are fixed in one stack or the other., We need to stop splitting effort. I've asked Rick before to remove it and get back to just "nfs" rather than "newnfs" etc. -- Peter Wemm - pe...@wemm.org; pe...@freebsd.org; pe...@yahoo-inc.com; KI6FJV UTF-8: for when a ' or ... just won\342\200\231t do\342\200\246
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.