On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 12:40:19PM -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > > We're heavy AFS users here at Boston University, and it's going to be a > > major blow to not have an AFS client available. OpenAFS, last I looked, said > > that it'd take them a year to properly develop a 2.6 version *if* they got > > some funding to do so -- and they don't. Arla doesn't seem to be going > > anywhere. > This is a fair assessement of the status, sans the "funding" whines. > It's not as if anyone else is rolling in money. I didn't mean it in a bad way. Just time is money and all that. :) > That client (kAFS) is not useful for any real work and I do not > see it becoming one before well into 2.7. Fair enough. > I think it would be the best if you found some grad students to > hack on AFS, either OpenAFS or kAFS. Both projects are amendable > to patches, in my experience, they just have no hacking cycles > to them. It's not important which one you decide to advance, > as long as you do. It's not like I've got any money either. But there _are_ grad students around here. :) > If you cannot do that, well, that's tough. Well, it _is_ tough, but I'm surprised that we're the only place that seems to have real interest. > To stick to RHEL 3 and OpenAFS would probably your best bet. Does RHEL plan to stick with the 2.4 kernel forever? -- Matthew Miller mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx <http://www.mattdm.org/> Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
