Re: any fundamental difference between fedora and suse NFSv4?
2010/1/3 Robert P. J. Day : > > i'm currently reviewing a doc on suse linux enterprise 11, the > section on NFS, but i don't have a SLES 11 machine in front of me. > could anyone who uses both SLES 11 and fedora 12 comment on how > indistinguishable the NFS setups are across those two distros? > > so far, i haven't seen a lot that's massively incompatible, and i > wouldn't expect to. obviously, the fundamental files are going to be > the same. > > rday > -- > I saw SLES 11 on my bro' laptop. I think it's totally different from any Fedora I've ever seen. It's strange and ugly. It has different folder structure and there's no yum (only some package manager called 'zypper')! Sorry, can't help you any more - I have no access to it now - I've persuaded my brother to install CentOS on it. -- Hiisi. Registered Linux User #487982. Be counted at: http://counter.li.org/ -- Spandex is a privilege, not a right. -- SIP: hi...@ekiga.net -- pub 1024D/085B139A -- Powered by Fedora: http://fedoraproject.org/ -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: any fundamental difference between fedora and suse NFSv4?
Robert P. J. Day wrote: > i'm currently reviewing a doc on suse linux enterprise 11, the > section on NFS, but i don't have a SLES 11 machine in front of me. > could anyone who uses both SLES 11 and fedora 12 comment on how > indistinguishable the NFS setups are across those two distros? > > so far, i haven't seen a lot that's massively incompatible, and i > wouldn't expect to. obviously, the fundamental files are going to be > the same. > I haven't use suse in quite some time. Are you asking about SLES (which is the equivalent of RHEL) or openSUSE which is more akin to Fedora, AFAIK? In any event, if I were doing what I think you're doing I would download either the openSUSE DVD or the openSUSE live CD's and try it myself in a Virtual Machine. I mean, who better to know what exact comparisons I'm looking for? As I said, I've not used suse in quite a while. But, your question as well as the post about firefox/kde integration has prompted me to start downloading the DVD to give it a try. I think it is safe to say that Fedora/RH place less emphasis on KDE than suse does. So, being a KDE leaning person it would be worth the time to check it out. Of course, just like trying any other distro there will be differences. I believe suse uses yast as their package manger. But, at least it is rpm based and I'm used to the warts of that system. Should I get the chance to experiment with NFSv4 on it I will. Probably try to export and mount file systems from/to a F12 system. Sounds like a nice challenge. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: any fundamental difference between fedora and suse NFSv4?
On Sun, 3 Jan 2010, Ed Greshko wrote: > Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > i'm currently reviewing a doc on suse linux enterprise 11, the > > section on NFS, but i don't have a SLES 11 machine in front of me. > > could anyone who uses both SLES 11 and fedora 12 comment on how > > indistinguishable the NFS setups are across those two distros? > > > > so far, i haven't seen a lot that's massively incompatible, and i > > wouldn't expect to. obviously, the fundamental files are going to be > > the same. > > > I haven't use suse in quite some time. Are you asking about SLES > (which is the equivalent of RHEL) or openSUSE which is more akin to > Fedora, AFAIK? technically, SLES 11, but i have to imagine that there's not going to be a lot of difference between the two in terms of NFS. > Should I get the chance to experiment with NFSv4 on it I will. > Probably try to export and mount file systems from/to a F12 system. > Sounds like a nice challenge. i'm currently digging through the docs and scripts, and my current challenge is to see what it takes to set up simple NFS on f12 using *only* nfsv4 with no earlier version compatibility. so far, still a bug or two in the system. rday -- Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry. Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: any fundamental difference between fedora and suse NFSv4?
On Sun, 3 Jan 2010, Ed Greshko wrote:
> Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > i'm currently reviewing a doc on suse linux enterprise 11, the
> > section on NFS, but i don't have a SLES 11 machine in front of me.
> > could anyone who uses both SLES 11 and fedora 12 comment on how
> > indistinguishable the NFS setups are across those two distros?
> >
> > so far, i haven't seen a lot that's massively incompatible, and
> > i wouldn't expect to. obviously, the fundamental files are going
> > to be the same.
... snip ...
> Should I get the chance to experiment with NFSv4 on it I will.
> Probably try to export and mount file systems from/to a F12 system.
> Sounds like a nice challenge.
ok, a few questions/observations regarding nfsv4, if i might. as i
mentioned in an earlier post, i'm working off of this:
http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5.4/html/Deployment_Guide/ch-nfs.html
and seeing what it would take to set up a simple NFS configuration on
fedora 12 that uses *nothing* but nfsv4. so feel free to comment on
the following suppositions:
* NFSv4 appears to be a stable technology that should work. (there is
an NFS 4.1 that is labelled as experimental, but am i correct in
assuming that NFSv4 is supposed to work properly?)
* i did notice that mounting via NFSv4 requires the "-t nfs4" mount
option, not just "-t nfs". is that actually a *requirement*? is the
mount command not smart enough to figure that out?
* as i read it, nfsv4 no longer requires portmapper, rpc.mountd,
rpc.lockd or rpc.statd, which inspires the question -- if you're
running *exclusively* NFSv4, is there any reason to even *start* those
last three daemons?
i ask since i'm looking at the startup script /etc/init.d/nfs, and
the "start" argument is processed thusly:
# See how we were called.
case "$1" in
start)
# Check that networking is up.
[ "${NETWORKING}" != "yes" ] && exit 6
[ -x /usr/sbin/rpc.nfsd ] || exit 5
[ -x /usr/sbin/rpc.mountd ] || exit 5
[ -x /usr/sbin/exportfs ] || exit 5
... snip ...
the problem, of course, is that if you're running exclusively NFSv4,
what's the point of checking for the existence of /usr/sbin/rpc.mountd
if you have no need to run it? and that same startup sequence
invokes rpc.mountd later, again unnecessarily.
and as i mentioned in an earlier
posting, if i make this change to /etc/sysconfig/nfs:
MOUNTD_NFS_V1="no"
MOUNTD_NFS_V2="no"
MOUNTD_NFS_V3="no"
then when i run "service nfs restart", i get:
# service nfs restart
Shutting down NFS mountd: [ OK ]
Shutting down NFS daemon: [ OK ]
Shutting down NFS quotas: [ OK ]
Shutting down NFS services:[ OK ]
Starting NFS services: [ OK ]
Starting NFS quotas: [ OK ]
Starting NFS daemon: [ OK ]
Starting NFS mountd: Usage: rpc.mountd [-F|--foreground] [-h|--help]
[-v|--version] [-d kind|--debug kind]
[-o num|--descriptors num] [-f exports-file|--exports-file=file]
[-p|--port port] [-V version|--nfs-version version]
[-N version|--no-nfs-version version] [-n|--no-tcp]
[-H ha-callout-prog] [-s|--state-directory-path path]
[-g|--manage-gids] [-t num|--num-threads=num]
[FAILED]
#
debugging the call to start rpc.mountd shows it being invoked with
the following args:
--no-nfs-version 1 --no-nfs-version 2 --no-nfs-version 3
which i would have *thought* is what i wanted to see. apparently not.
in conclusion, what capability *should* i expect from NFSv4 on
fedora 12? can't i even *start* it without supporting earlier
versions?
rday
--
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: any fundamental difference between fedora and suse NFSv4?
Robert P. J. Day wrote: > i'm currently reviewing a doc on suse linux enterprise 11, the > section on NFS, but i don't have a SLES 11 machine in front of me. > could anyone who uses both SLES 11 and fedora 12 comment on how > indistinguishable the NFS setups are across those two distros? > > so far, i haven't seen a lot that's massively incompatible, and i > wouldn't expect to. obviously, the fundamental files are going to be > the same. > I've had a bit of extra time and did install an openSUSE vm. While the underlying structure is the same, e.g. both systems have /etc/idmapd.com, /etc/sysconfig/nfs. But, it doesn't appear that suse uses nfsmount.conf. openSUSE separates the startup services into client (/etc/init.d/nfs) and server (/etd/init.d/nfsserver). openSUSE seems to have GUI tools that are a bit "better". The tools for nfs client and nfs server are separate and seem "better" integrated with their firewall tool. All that said, I've been able to mount a directory using nfs4 on the suse system that was exported from a f12 system. So, far I've not found the right incantation to do the reverse. I should say "thanks" for bringing this sort of thing up. Nice diversion to normal things and a new procrastination excuse. :-) Ed FWIW, I've not spent any time trying to get a pure nfs4 environment. IMHO, it doesn't buy anything. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: any fundamental difference between fedora and suse NFSv4?
Ed Greshko wrote: > > All that said, I've been able to mount a directory using nfs4 on the > suse system that was exported from a f12 system. So, far I've not found > the right incantation to do the reverse. > I had a feeling that sending that email would result in me finding the answer. FWIW, the answer was in the nfs documentation on suse. Now, to find out what/where/if there are settings to make F12 and openSUSE to behave in identical fashion. I've not decided whose behavior I like, best? -- Extreme feminine beauty is always disturbing. -- Spock, "The Cloud Minders", stardate 5818.4 Guess Who! http://tinyurl.com/mc4xe7 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: any fundamental difference between fedora and suse NFSv4?
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010, Ed Greshko wrote: > FWIW, I've not spent any time trying to get a pure nfs4 environment. > IMHO, it doesn't buy anything. i'm willing to agree. my interest was more in stress testing the setup to see if it would work the way the docs claimed. i was curious to see if, when one selects a pure NFSv4 environment, whether any legacy NFSv3 cruft got dragged along for the ride. when something like that happens, you can get annoyingly obscure errors. anyway, i think we've established that some cleanup could be done. i created the initial BZ report here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=552144 so people are welcome to add any further comments there. i'll probably add one more comment summarizing what i think i've figured out. rday -- Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry. Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: any fundamental difference between fedora and suse NFSv4?
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 15:04 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: > FWIW, I've not spent any time trying to get a pure nfs4 environment. > IMHO, it doesn't buy anything. Getting away from usernames and numerical user IDs having to all be the same on each computer? -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: any fundamental difference between fedora and suse NFSv4?
Tim wrote: > On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 15:04 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: > >> FWIW, I've not spent any time trying to get a pure nfs4 environment. >> IMHO, it doesn't buy anything. >> > > Getting away from usernames and numerical user IDs having to all be the > same on each computer? > > I think you are missing my point Using only nfsv4 mounts to achieve that is certainly is an advancement. However, the act of disabling the other nfs versions doesn't prevent using nfsv4 and as far as I can tell it offers no gain. I am, of course, assuming that anyone administering nfs would take security in mind and wouldn't be exporting file systems willy-nilly. -- Very few things happen at the right time, and the rest do not happen at all. The conscientious historian will correct these defects. -- Herodotus Guess Who! http://tinyurl.com/mc4xe7 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
