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

Bug#638448: marked as done (nfs-common: add support for pNFS)

Your message dated Mon, 22 Aug 2011 04:58:09 +0100
with message-id <1313985496.12047.17.camel@deadeye>
and subject line Re: Bug#638448: nfs-common: add support for pNFS
has caused the Debian Bug report #638448,
regarding nfs-common: add support for pNFS
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
638448: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=638448
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: nfs-common
Version: 1:1.2.4-1
Severity: wishlist


Hi.

With #627655 being solved in the next uploads, thus adding pNFS/NFS41 to the default kernels
it's worth to add the last missing piece for this to really work, and I guess nfs-common
is the right package.

As I describe here http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=627655#69
we'd need a modprobe config snipped which looks about like this:

alias nfs-layouttype4-1 nfs_layout_nfsv41_files
alias nfs-layouttype4-2 nfs_layout_osd2_objects
alias nfs-layouttype4-3 off

Not sure about the best name, perhaps
/etc/modprobe.d/nfs4.1.conf
?

Cheers,
Chris.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Sat, 2011-08-20 at 15:08 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-08-19 at 20:51 +0000, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> > Adding it to the modules,... what do you mean exactly with this? Adding a
> > modprobe.config to the modules package (which would be then missing in
> > custom kernels, I guess)... or add it to the module code?
> 
> The code.

I just wasted my time implementing this, but it's already been done in
3.1 anyway (thought not as nicely).

Ben.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


--- End Message ---
Reply to: