Jeffrey
Unfortunately in an MS environment where the users have been trained to
work with a windows fileserver and everything is done via shared
excel/word/access documents, persistent file corruption results if I
move their home directories to AFS at the moment, which means recovery
from tape.
T
Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
On Saturday, December 03, 2005 01:26:57 AM -0500 Jeffrey Altman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Jan 2006 - Stable Windows client with byte range locking that is
mandatory to use
I have a better idea. I'll decide when byte-range locking support is
mandatory for m
If the MIT presentation at the CMU Conference was on the web..
People would understand that 10E? of users rely on the windows client.
Reliability is not an option.
BTW: Are the CMU talks ever going to be posted?
tedc
___
OpenAFS-info mailing list
Ope
On Saturday, December 03, 2005 01:26:57 AM -0500 Jeffrey Altman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One of the points that I am attempting to make is that the rate of change
in the Windows client is going to continue to out pace the rate of change
in the Unix-based implementations for at least the ne
Do you ever sleep?
Its 10:47 in Anchorage...
tedc
___
OpenAFS-info mailing list
OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
On Saturday, December 03, 2005 01:26:57 AM -0500 Jeffrey Altman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Jan 2006 - Stable Windows client with byte range locking that is
mandatory to use
I have a better idea. I'll decide when byte-range locking support is
mandatory for my users to use. I can thi
At 1:26 AM -0500 12/3/05, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
What I am reading in this thread is that people are afraid
of the unknown.
No, I am afraid of my user community. They are a known quantity,
and I know I have reason to be afraid... They vary greatly in
what they use AFS for, and in how much
What I am reading in this thread is that people are afraid of the
unknown. I am going to make this argument because no one is saying "do
not implement this functionality" nor are they saying keep this
functionality out of my cell. What is being argued for is a method
that temporarily provide
At 12:00 AM -0500 12/2/05, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
Terry McCoy wrote:
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Neulinger, Nathan wrote:
Would it be worth considering having byte range lock support in the
code, but enabled with a flag or option of some sort so that code could
be staged in without fully implementing i
> If I provide a way to turn it off, how will you ensure that it gets
> turned back on in the future?
The same way we did ntp, rsh, setcrypt, etc. (Well, not exactly, but
close.)
Have it compiled in the code, but defaulting to off, let sites choose to
enable it.
> The benefits of locking will on
Terry McCoy wrote:
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Neulinger, Nathan wrote:
Would it be worth considering having byte range lock support in the
code, but enabled with a flag or option of some sort so that code could
be staged in without fully implementing it?
i.e. similar to fs setcrypt?
That would be
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Neulinger, Nathan wrote:
> Would it be worth considering having byte range lock support in the
> code, but enabled with a flag or option of some sort so that code could
> be staged in without fully implementing it?
>
> i.e. similar to fs setcrypt?
>
That would be a suitable.
- A bug in callback handling for readonly volumes in the Unix clients
has been fixed.
which wasn't a bug in 1.4.0
- MacOS 10.3 support has been updated.
also not a bug in 1.4.0
- Several MacOS 10.4 issues have been addressed.
10.4 wasn't going to be in 1.4.0
But it is not clear
age-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Terry McCoy
> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 4:27 PM
> To: openafs-info@openafs.org
> Subject: [OpenAFS] 1.4.1-rc2 build question
>
>
> Wondering if it would be possible to build 1.4.1 Release Can
Wondering if it would be possible to build 1.4.1 Release Candidate 2
without support on the server side for Windows byte range locking?
Why would you want to do this?
It appears that various non Windows locking related issues are getting
addressed within 1.4.1 such as:
- A bug in callback han
15 matches
Mail list logo
