On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 10:34, EC wrote: > Hmm... What do *you* think of it (since you seem to be related to MIT which > uses it as far as I know) ? > > BTW : I'm playing around with it for almost two weeks now and have my Linux > (LFS 5.1.1 based, 2.4.27 kernel, 1.2.11 OpenAFS) crashed more than once when > trying to configure / use OpenAFS.
I'd tend to suspect Linux in that case; it's difficult (to say the least) to support the enormous profusion of Linux kernel versions, each with its own VFS idiosyncrasies, and with random vendor patches on top of it. (We regularly see VFS deadlocks with OpenAFS on a particular kernel revision for SuSE 8.0; I'm not enough of a kernel hacker to be able to even begin to diagnose why using AFS on those kernels eventually causes *local* disk accesses to deadlock.) Aside from Linux issues of that variety, OpenAFS has been quite stable for us --- and, well, AFS is the sine-qua-non of computing at Carnegie Mellon. :) -- brandon s. allbery [linux,solaris,freebsd,perl] [EMAIL PROTECTED] system administrator [WAY too many hats] [EMAIL PROTECTED] electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon univ. KF8NH _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
