From: Steve Dickson Subject: Re: Does mountd/statd really need to listen on a privileged port?? Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:42:27 -0400 Message-ID: <46278DE3.9020509@RedHat.com> References: <17950.44333.118970.276558@notabene.brown> <4623BCD9.3090501@RedHat.com> <200704171208.51797.olaf.kirch@oracle.com> <17957.50539.958277.446719@notabene.brown> <17958.48121.280256.493824@notabene.brown> <46278794.6050307@RedHat.com> <20070419152149.GA9101@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: Neil Brown , Matthias Koenig , nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, jfs@computer.org, Olaf Kirch , anibal@debian.org To: "J. Bruce Fields" Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.91] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HeYn1-0007ng-IG for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:43:20 -0700 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1HeYn3-0007RF-TU for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:43:22 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20070419152149.GA9101@fieldses.org> List-Id: "Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 11:15:32AM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: >> Neil Brown wrote: >>> What would people think if I added it to the nfs-utils release and >>> made some improvements? Would that get into distros in parallel with >>> nfs-utils? >> Pormap/rpcbind is an RPC thing... not an NFS thing... Meaning >> there are other service (i.e. NIS) that needed it... so I >> really don't think it makes sense to include Pormap/rpcbind >> in nfs-utils... >> >> But... that does not mean an "upstream version" of rpcbind >> can be maintained by a single entity that everyone (including >> the distros) can pull from... Something I could (and would) >> support... > > And it that upstream version could still live in the nfs-utils tree, > couldn't it? Or it annoying to build multiple binary packages from one > upstream tree for some reason? Its not so much the annoyance... its the fact that other services like NIS also depend on portmap/rpcbind. Why should we require an AFS shop to install nfs-utils just so they can run NIS? I just think it makes sense to keep them separate... steved. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs