[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#271089: Including this could avoid confusion



Hi

As promised to Ian Kent, here some references to problems that
people experience trying to use autofs (still the 4.0.0pre10
currently in unstable and testing, or the 4.0.0pre1 in stable)
with the v3 kernel module. If I understood Ian right, this
_should_ _mostly_ work, supporting deep mount points as needed
by auto.net with autofs v3 kernel modules would be a bit
stretching it IMHO.

#255609	(note the remark about the autofs.net map not working)
#139009

The autofs packages I'm currently preparing will _not_ support
the old autofs module anymore. I can't even provide
configuration for modultils that falls back on autofs if autofs4
is not available (I tried, "probe autofs autofs4 autofs" causes
a modprobe loop ...), and some misfeatures and missing
features have to be expected as the two diverge further, so I
considered it to be generally whiser to simply not encourage
using the old kernel module with the new daemon.

ciao, 2ri
-- 
Secure email, spread GPG, clearsign all mail. http://www.gnupg.org
.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: