> ÂThe bug we are interested in involves the NFS server replying with an > ENOENT status. ÂThis should never happen and is causing problems with some > client side software, they don't know how to handle something that should > never happen. ÂI've searched through the public bugs I have access to, but > haven't been able to find any reference to this one. Why do you think that the NFS server should never reply with a ENOENT? This is a valid reply when the client attempts to access a non existing file. Due to the client cache coherency behaviour, there are circumstances when the server might reply with ENOENT when the file does actually exist. I suggest you give more details on the client and the server versions plus a way to reproduce the behaviour you observed. Red Hat Bugzilla bug #69077 appears to be a non-public bug. In addition, telling from the relatively low number, it must have been filed at least 5 years ago and unlikely to be relevant to RHEL 5. > ÂIt should be filed > against RHEL5.X and have some keywords including NFS and ENOENT, perhaps > ESTALE and EBUSY as well. Is this a question or a suggestion? -Imed -- Imed Chihi - ØÙØØ ØÙØÙØÙ http://perso.hexabyte.tn/ichihi/ -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
