Re: autofs 4.0.0 (pre1)

• Next message: Stephane Eranian: "copy_from_user() and block_write question"
• Previous message: Chris Sears: "<linux/linkage.h> generates incorrect cache alignments for 486 and above"
• In reply to: Jeremy Fitzhardinge: "RE: autofs 4.0.0 (pre1)"
• Next in thread: Jeremy Fitzhardinge: "Re: autofs 4.0.0 (pre1)"
• Reply: Jeremy Fitzhardinge: "Re: autofs 4.0.0 (pre1)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, Jan 25, 2000 at 11:49:16PM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> On 25-Jan-00 Frank van Maarseveen wrote:
> > 2.2.13 + http://www.goop.org/~jeremy/autofs/autofs-2.2.14-20000123.diff
> > userland: http://www.goop.org/~jeremy/autofs/autofs/autofs-4.0.0-pre1.tar.gz
> >
> > First, this is cool. Tree-mounts are very useful and this version seems more
> > stable.
>
> What version are you comparing it to?
2.2.10-ac11

In case you're wondering why: almost no 2.2.x kernel is usable (at my
work) because they all suffer from an NFS client bug which is fixed by
Trond's patch I'm using in 2.2.13. Without this patch, redirecting setuid
program output to an NFS mounted FS fails: data is discarded because I/O
is done with the credentials of the calling process (e.g. setuid root)
instead of the opener of the file.

-- 
Frank
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

• Next message: Stephane Eranian: "copy_from_user() and block_write question"
• Previous message: Chris Sears: "<linux/linkage.h> generates incorrect cache alignments for 486 and above"
• In reply to: Jeremy Fitzhardinge: "RE: autofs 4.0.0 (pre1)"
• Next in thread: Jeremy Fitzhardinge: "Re: autofs 4.0.0 (pre1)"
• Reply: Jeremy Fitzhardinge: "Re: autofs 4.0.0 (pre1)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 31 2000 - 21:00:17 EST