SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

February 2008

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jon Peatfield <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Jon Peatfield <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:22:29 +0000
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (28 lines)
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, Connie Sieh wrote:

> ftp.scientificlinux.org is now up.
>
> The new test NFS kernel died when there was a "NFS server" problem.
> We have gone back to the prior kernel.
>
> -Connie Sieh

Sorry to be a pain, but which 'test' kernel was that?  I should probably 
be able to tell but is this an sl4 or sl5 server?

I'm currently trying to decide whether to stop waiting for TUV to get 
their act together and just roll my own version of kernel-2.6.18-53.1.6 
without the 4 patches which reduce nfs-client performance and adding in 
the nfs-server ACL patch (nfsd has had acl support broken since -53 as far 
as I can tell).

If you mean -78 or -79 then those havn't been through much QA yet wich is 
why I'm not happy to put them in production yet.

Most of my 'important' servers are *still* running sl4 and I'm still 
trying to decide if I trust them not to have slipped something into 
2.6.9-67.0.4 which breaks nfs there as well so those are still using 
2.6.9-67.0.1 at the moment...

  -- Jon

ATOM RSS1 RSS2