On Tue, 2001-11-20 at 16:04, Rich Puhek wrote: > Don't be too hard on people who seem to underestimate your knowledge of > a subject... often it's easiest to start from a certain point in an > explanation to be certain everyone's on the same page... That's also > very handy for others following along in the list or in the archives of > a list.
No problem. I did sound incoherent at the beginning! Got to proof read more as well. I wonder if another network filesystem would be the answer, e.g. Coda: http://www.coda.cs.cmu.edu/ I was going to attempt to implement it until I discovered that it hasn't been packaged for unstable yet. It looks like unofficial packages are available: http://rpmfind.net/linux/coda/debian/binary-i386/ Has anyone used them? I don't want to risk destroying my data right before I commence a big backup ;-) Having looked though the Coda user manual it appears configuration is rather complex (plus "Coda is very differently organized from NFS and Windows/Samba shares"). I've now just found that current NFS implementations are specially designed to NOT cross mount points: http://playground.sun.com/pub/nfsv4/nfsv4-wg-archive/1996/0004.html The NFS protocol is specified to not let a NFS client cross mount points. This is so the NFS client does not get confused about the identity of files in the even[t] two files on two different server file systems share the same file id (inode #). Which is a PITA, meaning I will will have to reproduce all the mount points on the client computer if I implement NFS. It appears my perspective fits into this category: This semantic is not desired by some clients, such as PC desktops. The proposal, as described previously, is to make mount point crossing optional. Regards, Adam
