root umask and building ports
Karl Dunn
kdunn at acm.org
Sun Aug 4 16:54:08 UTC 2013
I discovered the hard way, when building ImageMagick-6.7.9.4 on
9.1-RELEASE, that having root's umask set to 077 is a mistake.
Lots of directories and some files, in ImageMagick itself and some of the
dependent ports, had other and group perms set to ---. No good. Hard to
fix after the fact: I tracked down all the problems with four-liner
command that used find, ls, and grep; then I fixed them "by hand", more or
less.
Made a lot of work for myself, just to get mogrify to run in a script that
generates per-user web activity bar graphs once a week.
This is probably not a new discovery to most. I have been using FreeBSD
for a long time (about 15 years), but I still regard myself as a newbie.
Lesson learned. Leave root umask set to 022. (Maybe ports should be
written to not depend on root's umask?)
Karl Dunn
kdunn at acm.org
On Sun, 4 Aug 2013, freebsd-stable-request at freebsd.org wrote:
> Send freebsd-stable mailing list submissions to
> freebsd-stable at freebsd.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> freebsd-stable-request at freebsd.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> freebsd-stable-owner at freebsd.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of freebsd-stable digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Strange sendmail behaviour after upgrade to 9.1-BETA2
> (Pavel Timofeev)
> 2. Re: ZFS: can't read MOS of pool (Andriy Gapon)
> 3. Re: /usr/bin/ld: warning: creating a DT_TEXTREL in a shared
> object after freebsd-update (Fabian Wenk)
> 4. Re: Problem with zfsloader on 9.2-BETA2 (Andriy Gapon)
> 5. Re: Strange sendmail behaviour after upgrade to 9.1-BETA2
> (Pavel Timofeev)
> 6. NFS locking between 8.3-STABLE (jan 2013) and 9.2-BETA2 --
> Firefox SQLite locking issue (John Reynolds)
> 7. Re: NFS locking between 8.3-STABLE (jan 2013) and 9.2-BETA2
> -- Firefox SQLite locking issue (Rick Macklem)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2013 17:41:58 +0400
> From: Pavel Timofeev <timp87 at gmail.com>
> To: Ruben de Groot <mail25 at bzerk.org>
> Cc: freebsd-stable at freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: Strange sendmail behaviour after upgrade to 9.1-BETA2
> Message-ID:
> <CAAoTqfu7n9j9V=H4Af2oTka=aS_UqKwkMCxE=AJM9i3GqXbLbA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> 2013/8/2 Ruben de Groot <mail25 at bzerk.org>:
>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 04:54:08PM +0400, Pavel Timofeev typed:
>>> I've just installed new fresh 9.2-BETA2 amd64 on another machine.
>>> Same behaviour - Sendmail asks DNS only for AAAA record of mx server.
>>> We don't use IPv6 in our company.
>>>
>>> 2013/7/31 Pavel Timofeev <timp87 at gmail.com>:
>>>> I wanted to say that sendmail asks only AAAA (IPv6) record of mx
>>>> server, but not A (IPv4).
>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>
>>>> 2013/7/31 Pavel Timofeev <timp87 at gmail.com>:
>>>>> Looks like my sendmail uses only IPv6 to resolve mx server dns name to
>>>>> ip address.
>>>>>
>>>>> 14:59:50.793338 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.19032 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>> 53417+ AAAA? xxx.ru. (24)
>>>>> [13/98]
>>>>> 14:59:50.793662 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.19032:
>>>>> 53417* 0/1/0 (75)
>>>>> 14:59:50.793696 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.55299 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>> 53418+ A? xxx.ru. (24)
>>
>> Here it is definately asking an A record.
>
> And? It's not A record of mx server.
>
>>>>> 14:59:50.794087 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.55299:
>>>>> 53418* 7/0/0 A 192.168.2.11, A 192.168.2.12, A 192.168.41.4, A
>>>>> 192.168.14.12, A 192.168.34.100, A 192.168.34.110, A 192.168.44.19
>>>>> (136)
>>
>> And here is the reply. The quetion is more why is it repeating the same
>> query (below) over and over.
>
> Yes, reply about xxx.ru, not about mx server's IP which is kalmar.xxx.ru
>
>>
>> Ruben
>>
>>>>> 14:59:50.973445 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.29244 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>> 53419+ MX? xxx.ru. (24)
>>>>> 14:59:50.973754 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.29244:
>>>>> 53419* 1/0/1 MX kalmar.xxx.ru. 10 (63)
>>>>> 14:59:50.974061 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.56461 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>> 53420+ AAAA? kalmar.xxx.ru. (31)
>>>>> 14:59:50.974340 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.56461:
>>>>> 53420* 0/1/0 (82)
>>>>> 14:59:50.974570 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.28332 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>> 53421+ AAAA? kalmar.xxx.ru. (31)
>>>>> 14:59:50.974887 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.28332:
>>>>> 53421* 0/1/0 (82)
>>>>> 14:59:50.974919 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.21453 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>> 53422+ AAAA? kalmar. (24)
>>>>> 14:59:50.975290 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.21453:
>>>>> 53422 ServFail 0/0/0 (24)
>>>>> 14:59:50.975314 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.63038 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>> 53422+ AAAA? kalmar. (24)
>>>>> 14:59:50.975674 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.63038:
>>>>> 53422 ServFail 0/0/0 (24)
>>>>> 14:59:50.975749 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.38393 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>> 53423+ AAAA? kalmar.xxx.ru. (31)
>>>>> 14:59:50.976105 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.38393:
>>>>> 53423* 0/1/0 (82)
>>>>> 14:59:50.976176 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.45558 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>> 53424+ AAAA? kalmar. (24)
>>>>> 14:59:50.976483 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.45558:
>>>>> 53424 ServFail 0/0/0 (24)
>>>>> 14:59:50.976512 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.45297 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>> 53424+ AAAA? kalmar. (24)
>>>>> 14:59:50.976864 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.45297:
>>>>> 53424 ServFail 0/0/0 (24)
>>>>>
>>>>> How to force it to use IPv4?
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> freebsd-stable at freebsd.org mailing list
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2013 21:59:15 +0300
> From: Andriy Gapon <avg at FreeBSD.org>
> To: ?ukasz W?sikowski <lukasz at wasikowski.net>
> Cc: freebsd-fs at FreeBSD.org, freebsd-stable at FreeBSD.org
> Subject: Re: ZFS: can't read MOS of pool
> Message-ID: <51FD5303.30507 at FreeBSD.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> on 02/08/2013 17:56 ?ukasz W?sikowski said the following:
>> This tools doesn't compile on 9.2-BETA2 r253884
>
> There are fixes for this in head that haven't been MFC-ed yet:
> http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/tools/tools/zfsboottest/zfsboottest.c?view=patch&r1=253067&r2=253066&pathrev=253067
> http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/tools/tools/zfsboottest/zfsboottest.sh?view=patch&r1=253068&r2=253067&pathrev=253068
> http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/tools/tools/zfsboottest/Makefile?view=patch&r1=253605&r2=253604&pathrev=253605
>
> It would be very interesting to see what zfsboottest says about the pool.
> Especially interesting it would be to see the error in a debugger.
>
> --
> Andriy Gapon
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2013 21:12:03 +0200
> From: Fabian Wenk <fabian at wenks.ch>
> To: freebsd-stable at freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: /usr/bin/ld: warning: creating a DT_TEXTREL in a shared
> object after freebsd-update
> Message-ID: <51FD5603.7040408 at wenks.ch>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hello Alex
>
> On 31.07.2013 10:45, Alex Povolotsky wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> I've updated (with freebsd-update) an old 7.3 to 9.1-RELEASE and now I
>> cannot build at least one port.
>
>> ===> Compilation failed unexpectedly.
>>
>> Googling did not yield anything useful. What should I check and fix?
>
> Did you install the compat7x package for 9.1? If not, then
> download it from [1] (for an amd64 system) and use the following
> command to install:
>
> pkg_add compat7x-amd64-7.3.703000.201008_1.tbz
>
> [1]
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/amd64/packages-9.1-release/misc/compat7x-amd64-7.3.703000.201008_1.tbz
>
> Then you should also rebuild all installed Ports, as it is noted
> in the documentation.
>
>
> bye
> Fabian
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2013 22:16:25 +0300
> From: Andriy Gapon <avg at FreeBSD.org>
> To: J David <j.david.lists at gmail.com>
> Cc: freebsd-stable at FreeBSD.org
> Subject: Re: Problem with zfsloader on 9.2-BETA2
> Message-ID: <51FD5709.7050306 at FreeBSD.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> on 31/07/2013 10:49 J David said the following:
>> But the system still wouldn't boot, moving on to:
>>
>> ZFS: can't find pool by guid
>> ZFS: can't find pool by guid
>>
>> We got around this by interrupting the stage1 loader and invoking
>> data/root:/boot/zfsloader.old instead. Then we moved the 9.2
>> zfsloader out of the way and restored the 8.4 loader.
>>
>> So this system only boots with the 9.2 gptzfsboot and the 8.4 zfsloader.
>
> Very unusual. Would you be able to try 9.2 zfsloader again?
> I would like to see values of loaddev, currdev and vfs.zfs.boot.primary_pool
> loader variables (if any are set). These can be obtained using 'show' command
> at loader prompt. Also, output of lsdev -v.
>
> Also, if you are able to build custom 9.2 zfsloader, then it would be useful to
> modify the printf statement (in zfs_fmtdev(), sys/boot/zfs/zfs.c) to print
> dev->pool_guid.
>
> --
> Andriy Gapon
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 09:27:27 +0400
> From: Pavel Timofeev <timp87 at gmail.com>
> Cc: freebsd-stable at freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: Strange sendmail behaviour after upgrade to 9.1-BETA2
> Message-ID:
> <CAAoTqfsm+CXk70zqALxtQQL-nO1NvkfE6OgJiU0DcexM6PfE9g at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Same thing on RELENG/9.2
>
> 2013/8/3 Pavel Timofeev <timp87 at gmail.com>:
>> 2013/8/2 Ruben de Groot <mail25 at bzerk.org>:
>>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 04:54:08PM +0400, Pavel Timofeev typed:
>>>> I've just installed new fresh 9.2-BETA2 amd64 on another machine.
>>>> Same behaviour - Sendmail asks DNS only for AAAA record of mx server.
>>>> We don't use IPv6 in our company.
>>>>
>>>> 2013/7/31 Pavel Timofeev <timp87 at gmail.com>:
>>>>> I wanted to say that sendmail asks only AAAA (IPv6) record of mx
>>>>> server, but not A (IPv4).
>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>
>>>>> 2013/7/31 Pavel Timofeev <timp87 at gmail.com>:
>>>>>> Looks like my sendmail uses only IPv6 to resolve mx server dns name to
>>>>>> ip address.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 14:59:50.793338 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.19032 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>>> 53417+ AAAA? xxx.ru. (24)
>>>>>> [13/98]
>>>>>> 14:59:50.793662 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.19032:
>>>>>> 53417* 0/1/0 (75)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.793696 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.55299 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>>> 53418+ A? xxx.ru. (24)
>>>
>>> Here it is definately asking an A record.
>>
>> And? It's not A record of mx server.
>>
>>>>>> 14:59:50.794087 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.55299:
>>>>>> 53418* 7/0/0 A 192.168.2.11, A 192.168.2.12, A 192.168.41.4, A
>>>>>> 192.168.14.12, A 192.168.34.100, A 192.168.34.110, A 192.168.44.19
>>>>>> (136)
>>>
>>> And here is the reply. The quetion is more why is it repeating the same
>>> query (below) over and over.
>>
>> Yes, reply about xxx.ru, not about mx server's IP which is kalmar.xxx.ru
>>
>>>
>>> Ruben
>>>
>>>>>> 14:59:50.973445 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.29244 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>>> 53419+ MX? xxx.ru. (24)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.973754 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.29244:
>>>>>> 53419* 1/0/1 MX kalmar.xxx.ru. 10 (63)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.974061 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.56461 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>>> 53420+ AAAA? kalmar.xxx.ru. (31)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.974340 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.56461:
>>>>>> 53420* 0/1/0 (82)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.974570 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.28332 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>>> 53421+ AAAA? kalmar.xxx.ru. (31)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.974887 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.28332:
>>>>>> 53421* 0/1/0 (82)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.974919 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.21453 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>>> 53422+ AAAA? kalmar. (24)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.975290 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.21453:
>>>>>> 53422 ServFail 0/0/0 (24)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.975314 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.63038 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>>> 53422+ AAAA? kalmar. (24)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.975674 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.63038:
>>>>>> 53422 ServFail 0/0/0 (24)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.975749 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.38393 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>>> 53423+ AAAA? kalmar.xxx.ru. (31)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.976105 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.38393:
>>>>>> 53423* 0/1/0 (82)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.976176 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.45558 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>>> 53424+ AAAA? kalmar. (24)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.976483 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.45558:
>>>>>> 53424 ServFail 0/0/0 (24)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.976512 IP reticulum.xxx.ru.45297 > hercules.xxx.ru.domain:
>>>>>> 53424+ AAAA? kalmar. (24)
>>>>>> 14:59:50.976864 IP hercules.xxx.ru.domain > reticulum.xxx.ru.45297:
>>>>>> 53424 ServFail 0/0/0 (24)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How to force it to use IPv4?
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> freebsd-stable at freebsd.org mailing list
>>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
>>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2013 23:34:13 -0700
> From: John Reynolds <johnjen at reynoldsnet.org>
> To: stable at freebsd.org
> Subject: NFS locking between 8.3-STABLE (jan 2013) and 9.2-BETA2 --
> Firefox SQLite locking issue
> Message-ID: <51FDF5E5.4070606 at reynoldsnet.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hello all,
>
> I've been recently building up a new Haswell box and after overcoming
> several problems have gotten things to mostly work. But I got stuck when
> trying to use Firefox 22. The bookmarks editor/container was always
> coming up empty and I was not able to import bookmarks I had from a
> saved profile. Additionally, the back/forward arrow buttons would not
> work. They were always grayed out making navigation impossible and thus
> rendering the browser fairly useless.
>
> I tried linux-firefox and the SAME problems existed. This led me to
> believe it wasn't a port problem. I saw mention after searching and
> searching for an answer of somebody who moved their account's $HOME dir
> from an NFS mounted volume to a local disk and some other problem they
> had went away. I thought "oh, this has got to be a locking problem." So,
> I tried this and Firefox 22 works perfectly on local disk! It's got to
> be the SQLite that FF22 uses for the "places.sqlite" and other SQL
> databases (bookmarks, etc.) and a locking issue since I have my $HOME
> directory mounted over NFS.
>
> My setup:
>
> NFS server: FreeBSD 8.3-STABLE as of Jan 2013
> nfs_server_enable="YES"
> nfs_server_flags="-u -t -n 4"
> nfsv4_server_enable="NO"
> rpc_lockd_enable="YES"
> rpc_statd_enable="YES"
>
> I am not knowingly running any other version of NFS server/client other
> than what any user would get by "default" (supposing NFSv3).
>
> NFS client: FreeBSD 9.2-BETA2 (I've been tracking sources and updating
> through buildworld, etc.)
> Just using normal "nfs" options when mounting the homedir directory on
> the client.
>
> So, questions:
> - I haven't upgraded the server to 9.x. I plan to do that along with
> new faster hardware, but since I have multiple "users" in the house, I
> have to have some dedicated time to work, research, plan, and pray
> things don't go wrong before I black-out the gateway/firewall/nat/etc
> box for all these "users" :). When I upgrade so that server is
> relatively equal to client (at least same 9.x version) should I see
> locking problems like the above? i.e. somebody else on this list HAS to
> be using NFS to serve up home directories. Do you see locking problems
> like that mentioned above?
> - I saw many posts talking about moving things to NFSv4 to resolve
> locking problems. If I was to upgrade the server to the latest
> 8.x-STABLE kernel/world should this interact with a 9.x world properly
> using NFSv4? Is the NFSv4 server in 8.x-STABLE "good enough" in this regard?
> - Without having to upgrade either my server or change to NFSv4 across
> the board, what other options might there be? The older hardware for
> this machine was running relatively the same kernel as my
> server--8.3-STABLE and I DID NOT SEE this behavior--which l leads me to
> believe that it is an 8.x <-> 9.x issue. Is there anybody out there
> besides me mixing these versions or am I the only person the planet that
> hasn't upgraded to 9-stable? :)
> - I see bits and pieces of documentation talking about how to use
> NFSv4, but I didn't see anything in the Handbook or out there in the
> wild that was a guide on how to migrate one's setup/config files. If
> there are good howto's or other articles on this please share!
>
> Thanks in advance for all answers. I appreciate the dedication that you
> all have!
>
> -Jr
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 06:32:22 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Rick Macklem <rmacklem at uoguelph.ca>
> To: John Reynolds <johnjen at reynoldsnet.org>
> Cc: stable at freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: NFS locking between 8.3-STABLE (jan 2013) and 9.2-BETA2
> -- Firefox SQLite locking issue
> Message-ID:
> <1072840488.5640439.1375612342793.JavaMail.root at uoguelph.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> John Reynolds wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I've been recently building up a new Haswell box and after overcoming
>> several problems have gotten things to mostly work. But I got stuck
>> when
>> trying to use Firefox 22. The bookmarks editor/container was always
>> coming up empty and I was not able to import bookmarks I had from a
>> saved profile. Additionally, the back/forward arrow buttons would not
>> work. They were always grayed out making navigation impossible and
>> thus
>> rendering the browser fairly useless.
>>
>> I tried linux-firefox and the SAME problems existed. This led me to
>> believe it wasn't a port problem. I saw mention after searching and
>> searching for an answer of somebody who moved their account's $HOME
>> dir
>> from an NFS mounted volume to a local disk and some other problem
>> they
>> had went away. I thought "oh, this has got to be a locking problem."
>> So,
>> I tried this and Firefox 22 works perfectly on local disk! It's got
>> to
>> be the SQLite that FF22 uses for the "places.sqlite" and other SQL
>> databases (bookmarks, etc.) and a locking issue since I have my $HOME
>> directory mounted over NFS.
>>
>> My setup:
>>
>> NFS server: FreeBSD 8.3-STABLE as of Jan 2013
>> nfs_server_enable="YES"
>> nfs_server_flags="-u -t -n 4"
>> nfsv4_server_enable="NO"
>> rpc_lockd_enable="YES"
>> rpc_statd_enable="YES"
>>
>> I am not knowingly running any other version of NFS server/client
>> other
>> than what any user would get by "default" (supposing NFSv3).
>>
>> NFS client: FreeBSD 9.2-BETA2 (I've been tracking sources and
>> updating
>> through buildworld, etc.)
>> Just using normal "nfs" options when mounting the homedir directory
>> on
>> the client.
>>
>> So, questions:
>> - I haven't upgraded the server to 9.x. I plan to do that along
>> with
>> new faster hardware, but since I have multiple "users" in the house,
>> I
>> have to have some dedicated time to work, research, plan, and pray
>> things don't go wrong before I black-out the gateway/firewall/nat/etc
>> box for all these "users" :). When I upgrade so that server is
>> relatively equal to client (at least same 9.x version) should I see
>> locking problems like the above? i.e. somebody else on this list HAS
>> to
>> be using NFS to serve up home directories. Do you see locking
>> problems
>> like that mentioned above?
>> - I saw many posts talking about moving things to NFSv4 to resolve
>> locking problems. If I was to upgrade the server to the latest
>> 8.x-STABLE kernel/world should this interact with a 9.x world
>> properly
>> using NFSv4? Is the NFSv4 server in 8.x-STABLE "good enough" in this
>> regard?
> Yes, I believe that a current stable/8.x NFSv4 server will work ok.
>
>> - Without having to upgrade either my server or change to NFSv4
>> across
>> the board, what other options might there be?
> Unless multiple clients share the same files concurrently that must be
> locked (not likely for home dir stuff), the "nolockd" mount option on
> the client will avoid having to use rpc.lockd and rpc.statd. (With this
> mount option, the locks are visible to all processes in the client,
> but not to other clients accessing the same file.)
>
>> The older hardware for
>> this machine was running relatively the same kernel as my
>> server--8.3-STABLE and I DID NOT SEE this behavior--which l leads me
>> to
>> believe that it is an 8.x <-> 9.x issue. Is there anybody out there
>> besides me mixing these versions or am I the only person the planet
>> that
>> hasn't upgraded to 9-stable? :)
>> - I see bits and pieces of documentation talking about how to use
>> NFSv4, but I didn't see anything in the Handbook or out there in the
>> wild that was a guide on how to migrate one's setup/config files. If
>> there are good howto's or other articles on this please share!
>>
> About all you need to do is add a "V4: ..." line to your /etc/exports
> and then set nfsv4_server_enable="YES" in /etc/rc.conf and reboot.
> On the client mount, you need to add "nfsv4" as a mount option.
>
>> Thanks in advance for all answers. I appreciate the dedication that
>> you
>> all have!
>>
>> -Jr
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-stable at freebsd.org mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
>> "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-stable at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>
> End of freebsd-stable Digest, Vol 524, Issue 9
> **********************************************
>
More information about the freebsd-stable
mailing list