SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL Archives

August 2006

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Maillling list for Scientific Linux developers worldwide <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 11 Aug 2006 10:10:47 -0700
MIME-version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Achim Gsell <[log in to unmask]>
Content-disposition:
inline
Content-type:
text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Subject:
Re: Which openafs for S.L. 4.4?
From:
Achim Gsell <[log in to unmask]>
Content-transfer-encoding:
7BIT
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]>
Organization:
Paul Scherrer Institut
Comments:
To: Troy Dawson <[log in to unmask]> cc: [log in to unmask]
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines) 
Hi Troy, All

On Friday 11 August 2006 06:25, Troy Dawson wrote:

> Back in May we talked some about moving to openafs 1.4.1, and we have
> some rpm's for it at
>
> ftp://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/40rolling/testing/i386
>/RPMS/openafs
>
> What did everyone think.  Should we move to it, or stay with 1.4.0
> like we currently have.
> As for myself, I'd like to move to it because we occasionally have
> users have problems that I'm quite sure are fixed in 1.4.1

We have moved all of our SL4 clients to version 1.4.1 and all AFS 
servers are running this version. Since we moved the servers from 1.4.0 
to 1.4.1 some of the problems with our Windows clients disappeared. But 
we are not using the RPM from above URL. We have our own customized 
version with some PSI specific changes.

Cheers

Achim

ATOM RSS1 RSS2