On 11/30/2010 03:04 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 12:44 +0100, Spelic wrote: >> On 11/30/2010 01:02 AM, Spencer Shepler wrote: >>>> It would not be backwards compatible: the linux server will currently >>>> reject any uid/gid usage by the client. >>>> >>>> That said, I can imagine that for 'sec=sys', we might be able to change >>>> the client to use the uid/gid format by default, and then change back to >>>> doing name@domain upon receiving the first NFS4ERR_BADOWNER error from the >>>> server. >>>> It the server changes to match this, then that might suffice solve the >>>> current problem that we have with doing nfsroot on NFSv4... >>>> >>> IMO: I wouldn't worry about the mixed scenarios to start with. >>> Provide the option on the client and server to use the straight-up >>> uid/gid to string mappings and this will satisfy these simple >>> deployments that are or will have trouble. >>> >> >> +1 for this. Changing mapping on the fly at the first NFS4ERR_BADOWNER >> received does not look very reliable to me: is scarcely controllable by >> the sysadmin and is gonna make the thing a headache to debug the first >> time it happens unwillingly (maybe the sysadmin was changing some config >> on the server and suddenly the everything stops working and he needs to >> restart the nfs client to restore things but this is scarcely >> intuitive...). +1 for simply providing a clear-upfront option for using >> numeric UIDs/GIDs. >> >> Thanks for your understanding :-) > > Sorry, but BADOWNER is an error that means "I don't get it" and the spec > _is_ adamant about what the client should do. This is a take it or leave > it: I'm not going to waste a lot of time and effort on this. > Perhaps a BIG FAT message in dmsg should help the poor admin investigating the matter. Thanks > Trond > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
