Ok, here's an updated patch. I did end up using 'indent' to do it. This
is the first time I've used it, but it seems to have done a pretty
decent job.
Some of the lines are still over 80 cols, but most of those are strings
in debug statements that are in heavily nested sections of code -- it
was
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for that.
As you probably realise adding this to the current beta is not a good
idea as this needs to stabilise to go to release. Making a significant
change like this at this time is a bad idea. So it's 4.1.5. At least
your not alone, I have a couple of other
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Jeffrey Layton wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for that.
As you probably realise adding this to the current beta is not a good
idea as this needs to stabilise to go to release. Making a significant
change like this at this time is a bad idea. So it's
I've been working on a patch for the userspace portion of autofs to
change the way that replicated mounts are handled. This patch changes
mount_nfs.c such that it parses all of the mounts in the list, sorts
them, and then tries to mount each in turn. The existing code breaks
(fails to mount) if it
On Sat, 2 Apr 2005, Jeff Layton wrote:
I've been working on a patch for the userspace portion of autofs to
change the way that replicated mounts are handled. This patch changes
mount_nfs.c such that it parses all of the mounts in the list, sorts
them, and then tries to mount each in turn. The
On Sun, 2005-04-03 at 00:53 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. That part of the code is a bit broken.
I've been working on it and I hope beta3 will work better.
One of the things that the replcated server code is meant to do is avoid
trying to mount to servers that aren't responding. How
Thanks for that.
As you probably realise adding this to the current beta is not a good idea
as this needs to stabilise to go to release. Making a significant change
like this at this time is a bad idea. So it's 4.1.5. At least your not
alone, I have a couple of other patches.
I'll have a look.
