(Illustration by Gaich Muramatsu)
"Robert V. Baron" <rvb_at_cs.cmu.edu> writes: > This was a slip up that was only in FreeBSD 2.2.x kernels. vop_select > should be defined and made to function like ufs_select ... it returns 1. That sounds good to me. I had a crazy thought about being able to open a file and have that operation succeed right away even if the file wasn't in-cache and then select returning true when the file was available, but it's probably best not to go there right now... > Again, coda does not support either mknod or mkfifo. We could discuss Agreed - I had no desire to actually do mknod - I just found it by kernel source inspection to be a simple test case to crash my kernel and demonstrate the bug. > Right now we are just returning an error. I am returning EIO -- which That's fine - I don't really care what the error is. But EIO seems wrong - there is no actual I/O error, but instead one is doing an operation not supported by a filesystem. I feel that EIO should be somehow possibly transient, that if one gets EIO the operation should at least have a chance to succeed later. > We had not planned to go on supporting 2.2.x when we switched to > -current on FreeBSD (The same applies to NetBSD.). Up till very I can appreciate your resources constraints, but I feel this is unfortunate. My group is running FreeBSD 2.2.x and NetBSD 1.3.2, because tracking -current is too painful. We are adding our own stuff, and trying to run coda, and keeping up with -current on top of that would be too hard, IMHO. I expect to shift to 3.1 or whatever in the spring or summer. (ie I only want cutting edge in areas I choose it.) Most people I know that use *BSD for work run some version of -stable, althought I realize Real Hackers(tm) run -current. So I believe that having coda work on -stable is important to building a user base. > pub/coda/freebsd/2.2.x/i386 Thanks for the pointer. I've actually built everything I'm running from source, so perhaps I spoke too soon above. Since it seems like the kernel stuff is stable, modulo the bug I just found, I expect I'll be able to compile the newer stuff without problems. BTW I'm in the process of setting up a 'real' server, one with raw partitions, 3 Gb of /vicepa and 256Mb of RAM (FreeBSD/i386 2.2.x). I think someone here may also port things to NetBSD/sparc 1.3.2, since we have a bunch of those. My 'test' server has been working stably for a few months, with a half-dozen clients. Greg Troxel <gdt_at_ir.bbn.com>Received on 1998-12-01 08:27:02