Hi Bruce,
On the call yesterday you asked me to double check that secinfo no name still works in NFSD. It does still work for me.
- Bryan
On 05/09/2011 08:59 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 02:24:39PM -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
>> Hi Bruce,
>>
>> On the call yesterday you asked me to double check that secinfo no name still works in NFSD. It does still work for me.
>
> My real question was whether the bug you reported here:
>
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-nfs&m=130192462122087&w=2
>
> appears to have been fixed (in my for-2.6.40 branch) to your
> satisfaction?
Yes it has. That's what I was trying to answer, sorry if I wasn't clear.
>
> --b.
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 02:24:39PM -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
> Hi Bruce,
>
> On the call yesterday you asked me to double check that secinfo no name still works in NFSD. It does still work for me.
My real question was whether the bug you reported here:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-nfs&m=130192462122087&w=2
appears to have been fixed (in my for-2.6.40 branch) to your
satisfaction?
--b.
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 08:39:28AM -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
> On 05/09/2011 08:59 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 02:24:39PM -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
> >> Hi Bruce,
> >>
> >> On the call yesterday you asked me to double check that secinfo no name still works in NFSD. It does still work for me.
> >
> > My real question was whether the bug you reported here:
> >
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-nfs&m=130192462122087&w=2
> >
> > appears to have been fixed (in my for-2.6.40 branch) to your
> > satisfaction?
>
> Yes it has. That's what I was trying to answer, sorry if I wasn't clear.
Oh, sorry, I misundertood then. Got it, thanks!
--b.