Triode wrote: > Ok so it is doing what I expected. So this questions do we need > separate nfs and nfs4 types, can we just leave it to the user to specify > the type as an option field? Why are there different mount.nfs and > mount.nfs4 if they both do nfs4 by default? I dont use nfs so really > looking for what an nfs user would want if the default operation of > mount is nfs4?
It's true that currently if you select type nfs4 but specifiy vers=3 as an option you also end up with a NFS mount. It seems to me there are two obvious webui design choices here. 1. You have a only one nfs type in the drop down selection. It should be labeled "nfs" but the storage page help must say this will default to NFS4 unless the user enters the option vers=3 or 2. You leave both nfs and nfs4 as selectable share types and ensure when the user selects "nfs" as the share type the option "vers=3" is added to the mount command and /etc/fstab entry in the background. I would argue the second is preferable as the on screen selectable share type choices are immediately obvious to the user who may know little about possible nfs options, but at least knows there's a difference between nfs and nfs4 and which version is running on their nfs server. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Krisbee's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=59080 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101624 _______________________________________________ unix mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/unix
