On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 6:22 AM Stephen Morris <samorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11/6/20 4:21 am, Tom H wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 1:40 AM Stephen Morris <samorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On 10/6/20 7:12 am, Tom H wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 1:55 PM Stephen Morris <samorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I have the following statement in fstab: >>>>> >>>>> 192.168.1.12:/mnt/HD/HD_a2 /mnt/nfs nfs >>>>> nfsvers=1,x-systemd.automount,defaults 0 0 >>>>> >>>>> When I issue the command 'mount /mnt/nfs' it fails with the >>>>> following messages shown in dmesg, which indicate that the mount >>>>> seems to be trying to proceed via nfs4, why is it doing this when I >>>>> have the option nfsvers=1? >>>>> >>>>> [48439.472418] FS-Cache: Netfs 'nfs' registered for caching >>>>> [48439.472732] *** VALIDATE nfs *** >>>>> [48439.472741] *** VALIDATE nfs4 *** >>>>> [48439.476329] Key type dns_resolver registered >>>>> [48439.639981] NFS: Registering the id_resolver key type >>>>> [48439.639993] Key type id_resolver registered >>>>> [48439.639994] Key type id_legacy registered >>>>> [48439.844036] NFS4: Couldn't follow remote path >>>>> [48439.852856] NFS4: Couldn't follow remote path >>>>> [48439.898650] NFS4: Couldn't follow remote path >>>>> [48480.763754] NFS4: Couldn't follow remote path >>>>> [48480.774645] NFS4: Couldn't follow remote path >>>> >>>> nfsv1 has never existed. Use "nfsvers=3" or "nfsvers=4". >>> >>> In another thread to Roger I've mentioned that in F28, and even >>> though I didn't specify it, probably F30, Fedora used nfs4 by >>> default >> >> Indeed, nfsv4 has been the default for many releases. So it makes >> sense that the mount would fallback to nfsv4 if the requested >> version isn't available. >> >>> which would not enable mounting of my nas, I had to specify >>> nfsvers=1 in the mount instruction in fstab for the nas to be >>> mounted, which now seems to no longer work. Following your >>> suggestion I have tried nfsvers=3 and that has enabled the nas to >>> be mounted. >> >> I'm glad that "nfsvers=3" is working. Are you sure that you're not >> misremembering "nfsvers=1"? > > It is possible I'm not remembering it correctly. Some time back I > had an issue where when I specified the mount point in fstab and > manually issued the mount the mount would fail (I've forgotten the > exact syntax of the error) and when I raised a query on this list I > thought I was told to try nfsvers=1, but as you have said I could be > mis-remembering it. The other thing that I just found that might be > interesting is if I specify nfsvers=2 I get the message 'protocol not > supported'. For "nfsvers=1", I don't know. For "nfsvers=2", it's either disabled on your server or your client. Assuming that both are running Fedora 32. For the server $ g -A16 nfsd\] /etc/nfs.conf [nfsd] # debug=0 # threads=8 # host= # port=0 # grace-time=90 # lease-time=90 # udp=n # tcp=y # vers2=n # vers3=y # vers4=y # vers4.0=y # vers4.1=y # vers4.2=y # rdma=n # rdma-port=20049 $ For the client $ g _NFS_ /boot/config-5.6.6-300.fc32.x86_64 | sort # CONFIG_NFS_DISABLE_UDP_SUPPORT is not set # CONFIG_NFS_USE_LEGACY_DNS is not set # CONFIG_NFS_V2 is not set # CONFIG_NFS_V4_1_MIGRATION is not set CONFIG_NFS_ACL_SUPPORT=m CONFIG_NFS_COMMON=y CONFIG_NFS_DEBUG=y CONFIG_NFS_FS=m CONFIG_NFS_FSCACHE=y CONFIG_NFS_SWAP=y CONFIG_NFS_USE_KERNEL_DNS=y CONFIG_NFS_V3=m CONFIG_NFS_V3_ACL=y CONFIG_NFS_V4=m CONFIG_NFS_V4_1=y CONFIG_NFS_V4_1_IMPLEMENTATION_ID_DOMAIN="kernel.org" CONFIG_NFS_V4_2=y CONFIG_NFS_V4_SECURITY_LABEL=y $ So nfsv2's completely disabled on Fedora. _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
