From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: NFS: unknown mount option: grpid Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 11:34:49 -0400 Message-ID: <20080410153449.GA9429@fieldses.org> References: <47FE0C42.6030900@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <56D1CF7A-BB26-4D07-B47D-9D43D55A1B8F@oracle.com> <47FE2C2D.1070703@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Peter Staubach , NFS list , Jan Sanders , Linux NFSv4 mailing list To: Chuck Lever Return-path: Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214]:40126 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756116AbYDJPfO (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Apr 2008 11:35:14 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 11:17:48AM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote: > On Apr 10, 2008, at 11:03 AM, Peter Staubach wrote: > > Chuck Lever wrote: > >> Hi Jan- > >> > >> On Apr 10, 2008, at 8:46 AM, Jan Sanders wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I have come across a little NFS problem. > >>> > >>> My nfs client, a Ubuntu-Hardy machine with nfs-common-1.1.2 tries to > >>> mount a directory but fails complaining > >>> > >>> Apr 10 12:18:34 sorpe kernel: [ 490.911951]NFS: unknown mount > >>> option: grpid > >>> > >>> The mount options are rw,nosuid,grpid. The mount is done by > >>> autofs but > >>> trying to mount the directory usdin the same options rw,nosuid,grpid > >>> results in the same error. > >>> I checked using strace that the mount call was indeed done using > >>> grpid. > >>> The mount call returns with EINVAL invalis argument. > >>> > >>> From strace: > >>> mount("nfs-server:/volumes/www", "/vol/www", "nfs", MS_NOSUID, > >>> "grpid,addr=192.168.0.123") = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument) > >>> > >> > >> grpid isn't a valid NFS mount option; it's valid only for xfs and > >> ext2/3, according to mount(8). > >> > >> I can't explain why the earlier version of mount.nfs didn't > >> complain about it. > >> > >> > > > > I thought that the NFS mount command was supposed to ignore > > mount options that it didn't understand. It could perhaps > > give a warning message, but should mount anyway. > > > > I thought that this behavior was useful for automounter > > applications which have to be able to share maps in a > > heterogeneous environment. > > > Well, it does ignore legacy NFS mount options that are no longer > supported. > > However, I was not aware of a requirement for NFS mount to ignore all > options it doesn't understand. > > It's easy enough to add, I suppose. Community opinion? This is exactly what "-s" ("sloppy") is supposed to do, right? At least, that's what "man mount" says. --b.