Re: Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-02-01 Thread David Wolfskill
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:25:03 +1300 From: Joe Abley jab...@clear.co.nz Never had a problem with it. Just to confirm that amd is not hideously broken beyond the point where _some_ people can use it just fine. Likewise, though nearly all of our NFS activity is among FreeBSD boxen. And we use NIS

Re: Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-01-31 Thread David O'Brien
Yes, to be consistent with the state of world WRT NFS. Or at least with the leader -- Solaris. This has been the default in 3.0-C since the am-utils import. Yeah, well, amd is a whole other ball of wax. That's clearly broken in both 3.0-stable and 4.0-current Why is it clearly

Re: Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-01-31 Thread Jordan K. Hubbard
Why is it clearly broken? proto=tcp,vers=3 is what is in 3.0-RELEASE, Amd in 3.0 works for many. I won't defend that the new Amd works the best with us, but then neither did the old Amd. Erm, I haven't tried it between 3.0 and 3.0 boxes because all my test environments currently involve one

Re: Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-01-31 Thread Peter Wemm
Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: Why is it clearly broken? proto=tcp,vers=3 is what is in 3.0-RELEASE, Amd in 3.0 works for many. I won't defend that the new Amd works the best with us, but then neither did the old Amd. Erm, I haven't tried it between 3.0 and 3.0 boxes because all my test

Re: Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-01-31 Thread Bill Paul
Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, Jordan K. Hubbard had to walk into mine and say: Why is it clearly broken? proto=tcp,vers=3 is what is in 3.0-RELEASE, Amd in 3.0 works for many. I won't defend that the new Amd works the best with us, but then neither did the old

Re: Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-01-31 Thread David O'Brien
I use -l /tmp/.automsg (or some other filename that lusers aren't likely ..snip.. I've found that am-utils is much more verbose than previous versions of amd so you may not want to leave it that way permanently ... /var/log/amd.log and add it to /etc/newsyslog.conf. Since this is what I use,

Re: Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-01-31 Thread Jordan K. Hubbard
Err On all of the machines where I use amd, I don't use -l syslog. I use -l /tmp/.automsg (or some other filename that lusers aren't likely You're right, that does produce more information. Unfortunatly, not enough to help diagnose the problem. :( I think something more fundamental is

Re: Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-01-31 Thread Joe Abley
I've been using amd on bleeding-edge current for the past year or so with no problems - the servers in my case are Solaris 2.5.1 boxes. I remember becoming extremely confused when I configured my first amd map file, since there was no coherent documentation to be found at the time, but I ended up

Re: Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-01-31 Thread Garrett Wollman
On Sun, 31 Jan 1999 04:18:25 -0800, Jordan K. Hubbard j...@zippy.cdrom.com said: Erm, I haven't tried it between 3.0 and 3.0 boxes because all my test environments currently involve one of each (4.0 and 3.0), but I can certainly say that in none of these test environments does amd work at

Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-01-30 Thread Jordan K. Hubbard
Scenario: Two machines, releng3.freebsd.org (running 3.0-stable) and current.freebsd.org (running 4.0-current). releng3 has all the disk space and is the NFS server. current is an NFS client and uses releng3 for its CVS repository, FTP snapshot stashing area, etc. As of the day before

Re: Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-01-30 Thread John Polstra
In article 91639.917702...@zippy.cdrom.com, Jordan K. Hubbard j...@zippy.cdrom.com wrote: As of the day before yesterday, I started getting all manner of NFS errors on current and checked the amd.conf file it was using. Version 3 of NFS seemed to be the default (!) for amd so I changed it to

Re: Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-01-30 Thread David O'Brien
errors on current and checked the amd.conf file it was using. Version 3 of NFS seemed to be the default (!) for amd Yes, to be consistent with the state of world WRT NFS. Or at least with the leader -- Solaris. This has been the default in 3.0-C since the am-utils import. it to version 2

Re: Even more interesting NFS problems..

1999-01-30 Thread Jordan K. Hubbard
Yes, to be consistent with the state of world WRT NFS. Or at least with the leader -- Solaris. This has been the default in 3.0-C since the am-utils import. Yeah, well, amd is a whole other ball of wax. That's clearly broken in both 3.0-stable and 4.0-current and we're going to have to