> > I don't think so. Right now users know that if they don't use a minor > > version then they'll be getting a v4.0 mount. I think we should keep > > this behavior so we don't accidentally break people's configuration. > > > > This would be inconsistent and there for unexpected. > > What you suggest is: > * if user specifies no version then start with 4.1, work down to supported > version > * if user specifies major=4 only try 4.0 > * if user specifies major.minor only try major.minor > > I think a more expect behavior would be: > * if user specifies no version then start with 4.1, work down to supported > version > * if user specifies major=4 start with 4.1 til 4.0 > * if user specifies major.minor only try major.minor > > The preferred (implicit) minor is 1 in all cases > > The question is did users of major=4 meant 4.0 and were lazy to type ".0" > or did they mean "don't try 3 or 2" Have we always allowed specifying 4.0? Or was there a time when you could only specify 4 (meaning 4.0)? If the latter, then backwards compatibility suggests 4 should mean 4.0. > Current system compatibility is already changing by moving all case 1 above > from 4.0 to 4.1 by the next yum update. I think it would be reasonable to also > change case 2. And have a consistent semantics. Frank -- 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
