On Mon, 2002-10-28 at 17:27, David Thompson wrote: > Matthew Miller wrote: > >On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 10:30:28PM -0400, Tim C. wrote: > >> Another great use of this, we at UMBC have a /usr/local in afs space that > >> most clients are linked to. If there was some computer that didn't really n > >eed > >> access to afs cause it had all their files locally, then it could use this > >> read-only client to get /usr/local. It's not something they're allowed to > >> write to anyway, so it's actually better for us. > > > >This is exactly the situation at BU. Most departments have a fileserver with > >home directories, but we maintain an applications tree centrally. > > Especially if there is no client-side caching, you might as well run a read-only >samba and/or nfs server, and mount the data using those protocols. You could even >run the translator on the file server(s) themselves. > > I think it more matches the pattern of the linux kernel maintainers not wanting to >use code that they don't directly control. >
Again, I think it matches the pattern that they don't want to use code they can't put in the kernel. The ipl is NOT gpl compatible. -sv
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
