svn commit: r221124 - in head: . sbin/mount sbin/mount_nfs sys/amd64/conf sys/fs/nfsclient sys/i386/conf sys/ia64/conf sys/nfsclient sys/pc98/conf sys/powerpc/conf sys/sparc64/conf sys/sun4v/conf

[Rick Macklem]

> 
> If you don't share my preference then it would be good to make new
> NFS just 'nfs' everywhere (sysctls, fstype, etc.), so that we won't
> end
> up with 'newnfs' in random places in five years from now. What you do
> with old NFS is less important to me:)
> 
As you'll see from the post I just sent (about 5sec before this showed
up in my box), I don't mind the idea of the two clients not being
concurrently usable. (I did have that semi-hypothetical example, but
I, personally, don't think it's likely. I had assumed that others
would think this is "required", but if not, that's fine with me.)

My problem is that I don't know how to deal with two modules with
the same name. (Getting rid of the old one as a module and making
people have to compile it into their kernel solves that.) If both
still need to be loadable modules, I think I'm going to need some
help w.r.t. how to make that work. (The mount syscall tries to load
it. The /etc/rc.d/nfsclient script forces it to be loaded and who
knows what else. If there are two of them, then???)

rick