In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kevin Day writes: >Ack, I was using this very same thing for several devices in an isolated >peer-to-peer network to decide who the 'master' was. (Whoever had been up >longest knew more about the state of the network) Having this change could >cause weirdness for me too... I assumed (without checking *thwap*) that >boottime was a constant. > >Perhaps a 'real_boottime' or 'unadjusted_boottime' that gets copied after >'boottime' gets initialized so that others can use it, not just NFS? :) no, I think that is a bad idea. In your case you want to use the "uptime" which *is* a measure of how long the system has been running. -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far! To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Matthew Dillon
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Andrew Gallatin
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Matthew Dillon
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Kenneth D. Merry
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Andrew Gallatin
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Mike Smith
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Garrett Wollman
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Matthew Dillon
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Mike Smith
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Rodney W. Grimes
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Nate Williams
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Peter Wemm
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Warner Losh
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Warner Losh
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Tom Bartol
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Warner Losh
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Tom Bartol
- Re: Serious server-side NFS problem Warner Losh