Jeffrey, I’ll try it any way just to see how it crashes as well as trying to execute ThinApp applications off an AFS R/Only Repository.
Thanks again. Nick Valentine Telecommunications & Networks New Jersey Institute of Technology [email protected] Phone 973-596-5874 Fax 973-596-6427 From: Jeffrey Altman [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 6:13 PM To: Valentine, Nick Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OpenAFS] Windows AFS Client implemented as a Kernel mode or User mode driver? Nick: My point is that regardless of whether it is implemented entirely in userland or kernel you can't virtualize a file system. Prior to 1.7, OpenAFS was implemented as a userland only service and a network provider module that is loaded into all applications that piggybacked upon loopback network adapter driver and the Microsoft SMB redirector file system driver. In 1.7 OpenAFS replaces the loopback adapter driver and the SMB redirector file system driver with its own redirector file system driver. You can't virtualize parts of a file system and not do the entire thing. What would be an interesting direction would be executing ThinApp packages out of AFS on student desktop images so you don't have to deploy the packages everywhere. Jeffrey Altman On 11/29/2011 5:58 PM, Valentine, Nick wrote: Jeffrey, I only ask because if AFS Client 1.7 is implemented as a Kernel based driver, I cannot virtualize it. Then I can cross it off my NJIT List of Applications to Virtualize which was created by OpenAFS users/admins at NJIT. If it is implemented as a user based driver, I can probably virtualize parts of it so that it can access AFS. Does it make sense to do so? Most probably not. Do I use the product? No, but I have to support deployment onto student desktop images so my customers can access their files on AFS Repositories. Thank you for the fast response. Nick Valentine Telecommunications & Networks New Jersey Institute of Technology [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Phone 973-596-5874 Fax 973-596-6427
