Dear list,
maybe since 2 weeks (close to upgrade to Twenty_One), my nfs shares are
no longer mounted at boot. Claims that the nfs server is not resolvable,
but it clearly is. Raised the timeo to 200, but no luck. Hints? Bugworthy?
regards Jens
[root@andrea ~]# systemctl status media-jessa.mo
On 02/22/2015 09:00 AM, Jens Neu wrote:
Dear list,
maybe since 2 weeks (close to upgrade to Twenty_One), my nfs shares are
no longer mounted at boot. Claims that the nfs server is not resolvable,
but it clearly is. Raised the timeo to 200, but no luck. Hints? Bugworthy?
regards Jens
forgot t
On 02/22/15 16:06, Jens Neu wrote:
> On 02/22/2015 09:00 AM, Jens Neu wrote:
>> Dear list,
>>
>> maybe since 2 weeks (close to upgrade to Twenty_One), my nfs shares are
>> no longer mounted at boot. Claims that the nfs server is not resolvable,
>> but it clearly is. Raised the timeo to 200, but no
On 02/22/2015 09:13 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
Are you using the DNS server of the nfs client system?
All my systems use 192.168.17.2 as dns server: nfs-server, client(s),
etc. Technically the dns server is a CentOS 6.6 KVM machine with bind9
on the nfs-server.
--
users mailing list
users@list
On 02/22/15 17:40, Jens Neu wrote:
> On 02/22/2015 09:13 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>
>> Are you using the DNS server of the nfs client system?
>>
>
> All my systems use 192.168.17.2 as dns server: nfs-server, client(s), etc.
> Technically the dns server is a CentOS 6.6 KVM machine with bind9 on the
>
On Sun, 22 Feb 2015 09:00:32 +0100
Jens Neu wrote:
> maybe since 2 weeks (close to upgrade to Twenty_One), my nfs shares are
> no longer mounted at boot.
My consistent experience is that systemd has no clue when
the network is "up" if by up you mean actually capable of
talking to other things on
Yes.I have noted systemd stops the network then tries to umount nfs
on fedora 20. Not really a good plan.
And I also did the rc.local mount as it was not mounting on boot because
it tries to mount nfs before the network is live and fails.
There do seem to be some significant issues around
On 02/22/2015 03:24 PM, Roger Heflin wrote:
Yes.I have noted systemd stops the network then tries to umount nfs
on fedora 20. Not really a good plan.
Did you try f21?
I share your experience on f20, but the effect "healed by itself" with
f21. Actually, this really annoying deficiency
On 02/22/2015 06:50 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
I share your experience on f20, but the effect "healed by itself" with
f21. Actually, this really annoying deficiency of f20 was the #1 reason
for me to switch to f21.
Unfortunately - whatever this problem is - it does not "heal itself"
with 21, s
On Sun, 2015-02-22 at 09:14 -0500, Tom Horsley wrote:
> My consistent experience is that systemd has no clue when
> the network is "up" if by up you mean actually capable of
> talking to other things on the network. Thus all of the
> dependencies it waits on never wait long enough.
There was a thr
On Feb 22, 2015 1:01 AM, "Jens Neu" wrote:
>
> Dear list,
>
> maybe since 2 weeks (close to upgrade to Twenty_One), my nfs shares are
no longer mounted at boot. Claims that the nfs server is not resolvable,
but it clearly is. Raised the timeo to 200, but no luck. Hints? Bugworthy?
>
> regards Jens
Tom Horsley:
>> My consistent experience is that systemd has no clue when
>> the network is "up" if by up you mean actually capable of
>> talking to other things on the network. Thus all of the
>> dependencies it waits on never wait long enough.
Tim:
> There was a thread about that, last year, I t
This poroblem occurs on other unices as well, try using the bg option in your
nfs fstab entry.
Andy
On Sunday 22 February 2015 21:39:13 Pete Travis wrote:
> On Feb 22, 2015 1:01 AM, "Jens Neu" wrote:
> > Dear list,
> >
> > maybe since 2 weeks (close to upgrade to Twenty_One), my nfs shares are
>
On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 09:17 +, Andrew R Paterson wrote:
> This poroblem occurs on other unices as well, try using the bg option
> in your nfs fstab entry.
Putting fstab entries in is really only useful for what I consider to be
permanently available shares (or drives, if we're not talking abou
On 02/23/2015 10:17 AM, Andrew R Paterson wrote:
This poroblem occurs on other unices as well, try using the bg option in your
nfs fstab entry.
Andy
unfortunatley option bg does not resolve it. mount -a still is the way
to go.
-Jens
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubs
On 02/23/2015 05:18 PM, Tim wrote:
On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 09:17 +, Andrew R Paterson wrote:
This poroblem occurs on other unices as well, try using the bg option
in your nfs fstab entry.
Putting fstab entries in is really only useful for what I consider to be
permanently available shares (or
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:45 AM, Jens Neu wrote:
> On 02/23/2015 10:17 AM, Andrew R Paterson wrote:
>>
>> This poroblem occurs on other unices as well, try using the bg option in
>> your nfs fstab entry.
>
> unfortunatley option bg does not resolve it. mount -a still is the way to
> go.
Pre-syste
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 5:55 AM, Tom H wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:45 AM, Jens Neu wrote:
>> On 02/23/2015 10:17 AM, Andrew R Paterson wrote:
>>>
>>> This poroblem occurs on other unices as well, try using the bg option in
>>> your nfs fstab entry.
>>
>> unfortunatley option bg does not re
On 02/25/15 17:48, Jens Neu wrote:
> On 02/23/2015 05:18 PM, Tim wrote:
>> On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 09:17 +, Andrew R Paterson wrote:
>>> This poroblem occurs on other unices as well, try using the bg option
>>> in your nfs fstab entry.
>> Putting fstab entries in is really only useful for what I
Tim:
>> Putting fstab entries in is really only useful for what I consider to
>> be permanently available shares (or drives, if we're not talking
>> about nfs). i.e. Things that are *always* present.
Jens Neu wrote:
> I consider these shares to be "always present" and the host won't
> function p
On 02/22/2015 09:00 AM, Jens Neu wrote:
Dear list,
maybe since 2 weeks (close to upgrade to Twenty_One), my nfs shares are
no longer mounted at boot. Claims that the nfs server is not resolvable,
but it clearly is. Raised the timeo to 200, but no luck. Hints? Bugworthy?
Dear all,
iIssue is re
21 matches
Mail list logo
