On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 03:21:59AM -0400, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote: > Yeah, that should do. I don't think you need > to go out of the way to support lazy umount functionality > in *BSD, when it's not essential to the working of replace-brick > and other commands that use lazy umount. Here is my latest patch to fix replace-brick on NetBSD. http://review.gluster.org/#/c/8649/ Please review. -- Emmanuel Dreyfus manu@xxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
