On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 11:11 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 12:36 AM, Ian Kent <ikent@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I could leave it only for NFS, as it supports it anyway, and not pass it > > for any other mounts. Then any bug requests could be passed on the the > > file system maintainers. Then I could add it for that file system when > > done. > > > > The only annoyance with that approach is the autofs generic mount > > module, which is used to mount a number of file systems, would need to > > check the file system name to decide whether to add the sloppy option. > > > > TBH I'm not to fussy about what we do here but we need to make a > > decision before I do or I'll end up flipping back and forth. > > > > So I guess it's up to us to decide, ;) > > > > I'll post a message to the autofs list once we decide and see if we get > > any good arguments to change the approach and we can alter it as needed > > (if at all). > > Hi Ian, > > Any news about this? > > There's more and morecomplaints about the new behavior. I'm inclined > to just make it NFS-only, as that will restore the old state of > affairs. Good question, I must admit I had forgotten about it since with the report I had the subsystem changed to ignore the option. I was going to not pass it from autofs and I have a patch for that. We could use that, after I check I've cover the bases, and I'll commit it upstream with the next set of patches (that might be a little while though). Ian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe autofs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
