Re: Fam mustn't depend on portmap (was Re: new portmap packages, testers wanted)
Steve Greenland wrote:
>Hmmm, I seem to be assuming that a famd is running, which the portmapper
>technique wouldn't require. Is that show stopper? Is there any reason
>that famd can't just run all the time, like any other daemon? Presumably
>if no one is actually monitoring any nodes, the overhead is negligible.
As far as I can tell, fam already *does* run all the time, so that sure as
hell isn't a showstopper.
Reply to: