From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Peter_=C5strand?= Subject: Re: Detectiong Network and umount / mount NFS Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:26:45 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <1114027379.4266b57354785@webmail.tusofona.com> <4266C21D.9030305@RedHat.com> <1114038052.4266df245e54e@webmail.tusofona.com> <1114042784.17214.11.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <1114088708.10727.9.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="789237761-1884212515-1114111204=:16285" Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.11] helo=sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1DOhKH-0007gd-Ru for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 12:27:01 -0700 Received: from mail.cendio.se ([193.12.253.69]) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1DOhK9-0004q3-8D for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 12:27:01 -0700 Received: from maggie.lkpg.cendio.se (maggie.lkpg.cendio.se [10.47.1.208]) by mail.cendio.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id F258D25DB21 for ; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:26:45 +0200 (CEST) To: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: <1114088708.10727.9.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --789237761-1884212515-1114111204=:16285 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 21 Apr 2005, Trond Myklebust wrote: > to den 21.04.2005 Klokka 10:14 (+0200) skreiv Peter =C5strand: >>> If you want that sort of behaviour, then read all about the "soft" mo= unt >>> option ("man 5 nfs", and http://nfs.sourceforge.net/#faq_d6). >> >> I think Esqueleto wants a Solaris-type "umount -f". I'd like to have t= hat >> too. > > You didn't actually read that FAQ entry, that I pointed to, did you? > Please do. I did not, because I thought it was only about soft mounts. I don't want=20 soft mounts. I've read it now, but it didn't make me much wiser. It talks about soft=20 mounts, which I don't want. It takes about killing processes, which I=20 don't want to do by hand: I think "umount -f" should suffice. The the=20 processes itself can decide what to do with the EIO. > This is not something that will happen soon, unless you or someone else= =20 > who feels strongly about it pulls up their sleeves, and starts=20 > developing. Adding bugzilla entries for this type of feature will just=20 > serve to annoy. I'm patient. I don't understand why people are annoyed by bugzilla=20 entries, though. --=20 Peter =C5strand Chief Developer Cendio www.thinlinc.com Teknikringen 3 www.cendio.se 583 30 Link=F6ping Phone: +46-13-21 46 00 --789237761-1884212515-1114111204=:16285-- ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs