DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition;
        b=PHp83dTOfPOw/DotjE4xjr4nIWMmaVCTAE8yK1IVDrH9LuZFOY1X2SDlqeyuQernL+0PLE2XpUPBt4Du8LPXrdvI8CO+Y1RaoEV49ZSUJc022dzrXumUP5WGOxpLJvfR/8wbSC010jLPZUGlqdA4rTdMPjnSP0aToM2rR83Ppy8=
Message-ID: <5d75f4610601132130s4870d9eaq9261450905d6b888@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:30:18 +0700
From: BuraphaLinux Server <buraphalinuxserver@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: nlm_udpport vs. udpport vs lockd.nlm_udpport vs etc.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1025
Lines: 26

I am attempting to setup a firewall for an NFS v3 server.  I need to know where
the lockd ports will be.  I have added an append line to my lilo.conf
that looks like
this, and it was working in the 2.4 kernels:

append="lockd.nlm_udpport=32768 lockd.nlm_tcpport=32768"

I am using kernel 2.6.15 from ftp.kernel.org and I am trying to learn
what to do.
But the file fs/lockd/svc.c seems to want this without the 'lock.' in front.
But the file Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt suggests
lockd.udpport and lockd.tcpport (no "nlm_").

1.  Why do the files in the kernel disagree with each other?
2.  What do I really need on my append="" line, or is there some other
     way to set this now?
3.  Should I hardcode the ports in the kernel source code and recompile?

Thank you,

JGH
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/