This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: NFS server (final?)

> I've just tried the new binaries and the nfs daemon no longer 
> fills the 
> Application Log with error messages :)

> The other problem is still there, but this is expected. If anyone can 
> offer any hints on how to debug this problem (I'm not familiar
> with nfsd at all) I'd be happy to help to trace it down. Btw 
> it is 100% 
> reproducible in my setup and with the suggested file sizes.

I tried reproducing it last night, but I was working over a VPN,
and it was painfully slow - copying about 4K/sec.  I'll take a
look at it again today, now that I'm back on a local network.

BTW - did you execute the test using a script, or from the command
line?  If it was script execution, then you may have tickled a
file descriptor caching problem (by executing a remove immediately
after a copy).
> Sam, some notes about the Cygwin specific readme file:
> Maybe you have to add some lines to it as you have suggested:
> "So, is the answer to remove the seteuid(ROOT_UID) call, and document
> the requirement that the server be run under an account with 
> the "Create
> a process level token" right?"

I will do so.
> Also I noticed the following minor inconsistencies in the readme file:
> Runtime requirements:
>   cygwin-1.3.17 or newer
> Build requirements:
>   cygwin-1.3.17 or newer
>   sunrpc
> Maybe cygwin-1.3.20 would be better. If you're actually using 
> 1.3.17 then this is OK.

I was using 1.3.17 when I started porting :-) I'll update it.
> Also this line is incorrect:
> Files included in the binary distro
>   /usr/bin/nfs-server-config
>   /usr/doc/Cygwin/nfs-server-2.3-1.README
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Yep.  Thanks again!
> Having said that, I think it's time to decide if we want the nfs 
> server to become a part of the Cygwin distro now. If we put aside the
> problem with the directory removal maybe it is good to release this 
> version as is. Then when the "bug" is fixed a version -2 will 
> be released.
> I don't really know, how big is the demand of a nfs server and how
> the inclusion of one will impact the popularity of Cygwin, 
> but I remember
> some comments on the main list, that some people are using 
> Interix only 
> for its nfs server functionality.

I'd be happy to release at this point, though I'd like to take a look
at your test case and see if the problem has an obvious cause and
solution first.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]