Re: autofs 4.1.4 in sarge
On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 10:01:21PM -0300, Daniel Andre Vaquero wrote:
>> Well, at least one user seems to think that 304245 is important enough to be
>> worth fixing; if you agree with him, then it's fine to allow this fix in via
>> unstable. That wouldn't apply to whatever low-priority fixes upstream has
>> thrown into 4.1.4, however.
> If you agree that the bug is important, I'll upgrade its severity to
> "important". When people use autofs for NFS mounts I'd say the
> intermitent fails make the system unreliable.
Yes, I agree -- it should definitely be fixed. I'd really prefer the entire
4.1.4 went in, but as the release team won't allow that, this is the best way
to do it.
> I have backported the fix from 4.1.4 + non-replicated-ping.patch to
> 4.1.4_beta2, and I am currently testing it. It is just a diff from
> mount_nfs.c, that follows attached.
Thanks. Let me know if the testing is OK (I've never seen the problem myself,
despite using autofs for NFS mounts quite a lot in production) and I'll
unmerge the bugs and do the upload. (I'd probably prefer two separate patches
if that isn't too much work, but it isn't critical.)
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
Reply to: