> I could live with that. > > Though the other reason I cut it was because I think it needs updates > too and I wasn't sure exactly how to handle them. > > The v4 case is more important and should probably be dealt with first. > I think the answer there is just "don't mount /var over NFSv4", period. > > And maybe we should be more specific: the problem is with /var/lib/nfs, > not all of /var. I see it now. Yeah, I agree. If we keep that description, we need to consider the v4 case ... After reviewing what will happen if we delete this description for /var, I've changed my mind. I believe it won't cause a serious problem. I have concluded that it is no longer needed for the following reasons: 1. Users who build a new system with NFSv2 or v3 are not so many nowadays. 2. Even with the nolock option, mounting /var is risky. For example, if /var is mounted when the system is running, the existing processes would be prevented from accessing the files they require. In other words, I agree with your idea. Your first patch looks good to me. I think we can remove the part "using nolock to mount /var with v2/v3" from the nfs man page. I apologize for taking your time. Yuki Inoguchi
