Hi,
On 06/18/18 17:42, Rick Macklem wrote:
Steve Wills wrote:
Would it be possible or reasonable to use the client ID to log a message
telling the admin to enable a sysctl to enable the hacks?
Yes. However, this client implementation id is only seen by the server
when the client makes a mount attempt.
I suppose it could log the message and fail the mount, if the "hack" sysctl
isn't
set?
I hadn't thought of failing the mount, just defaulting not enabling the
hacks unless the admin chooses to enable them. But at the same time
being proactive about telling the admin to enable them.
I.E. keep the implementation RFC compliant since we wouldn't be changing
the behavior based on the implementation ID, only based upon the admin
setting the sysctl, which we told them to do based on the implementation ID.
Just an idea, maybe Warner's suggestion is a better one.
Steve
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
