Re: cleanup of rc.conf ( -4.x )

1999-02-09 Thread Brian Feldman
On Mon, 8 Feb 1999, Matthew Dillon wrote: > This does not make any operational change except to get rid > of the $conf_dir junk from rc.conf, which I originally put > in to try to bootstrap rc.diskless. > > A much better way to do rc.diskless was suggested to me, > which I'm

Re: cleanup of rc.conf ( -4.x )

1999-02-09 Thread Eivind Eklund
On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 08:14:55PM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote: > This does not make any operational change except to get rid > of the $conf_dir junk from rc.conf, which I originally put > in to try to bootstrap rc.diskless. > > A much better way to do rc.diskless was suggested to

Re: cleanup of rc.conf ( -4.x )

1999-02-09 Thread Garrett Wollman
< said: >> A much better way to do rc.diskless was suggested to me, >> which I'm going to implement. It involves retargeting >> the /conf/ME softlink by mount_union'ing a small MFS > Union mounts do not work, and I believe they are some distance from > working (unless you have better patches th

Re: cleanup of rc.conf ( -4.x )

1999-02-09 Thread Matthew Dillon
:>> the /conf/ME softlink by mount_union'ing a small MFS : :> Union mounts do not work, and I believe they are some distance from :> working (unless you have better patches than I do, of course). : :Last I checked, union mounts work just fine, thank you very much. :unionfs (which should have been

Re: cleanup of rc.conf ( -4.x )

1999-02-09 Thread Garrett Wollman
< said: > union mounts are broken. I must have panic'd my test box 50 times > trying to get them to work. > Fortunately I found another way using the less sophisticated > -o union type of mount That is a union mount. Which is it -- broken or not? -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Woll

Re: cleanup of rc.conf ( -4.x )

1999-02-09 Thread Dag-Erling Smorgrav
Matthew Dillon writes: > union mounts are broken. I must have panic'd my test box 50 times > trying to get them to work. Nonono. The union filesystem ('mount -t union') is broken. Union mounts ('mount -o union') are not. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - d...@flood.ping.uio.no To Unsubscri

Re: cleanup of rc.conf ( -4.x )

1999-02-09 Thread Matthew Dillon
:Matthew Dillon writes: :> union mounts are broken. I must have panic'd my test box 50 times :> trying to get them to work. : :Nonono. The union filesystem ('mount -t union') is broken. Union :mounts ('mount -o union') are not. : :DES :-- :Dag-Erling Smorgrav - d...@flood.ping.uio.no

Re: cleanup of rc.conf ( -4.x )

1999-02-09 Thread Mikhail Teterin
> Fortunately I found another way using the less sophisticated > -o union type of mount ( verses the more sophisticated mount_union ). Well, there are problems here too. I had /var/mail mounted with -o union from another host. My own, local, mailbox would get corrupted every once in a whil

Re: cleanup of rc.conf ( -4.x )

1999-02-09 Thread perlsta
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > > Fortunately I found another way using the less sophisticated > > -o union type of mount ( verses the more sophisticated mount_union ). > > Well, there are problems here too. I had /var/mail mounted with -o union > from another host. My own,

Re: cleanup of rc.conf ( -4.x )

1999-02-09 Thread Matthew Dillon
:> Well, there are problems here too. I had /var/mail mounted with -o union :> from another host. My own, local, mailbox would get corrupted every once :> in a while -- lots of \0, some other strings. 16K in size. :> :> This is on 3.0-RELEASE, with NFSv3. The server is Solaris. : :There were sever

Re: cleanup of rc.conf ( -4.x )

1999-02-09 Thread Brian Feldman
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Garrett Wollman wrote: > < said: > > >> A much better way to do rc.diskless was suggested to me, > >> which I'm going to implement. It involves retargeting > >> the /conf/ME softlink by mount_union'ing a small MFS * Note this. > > > Union mounts do not work, and I believe