Steve, thank you for your response. Unfortunately, I have no direct connection to the internet at my workplace. So YOU is not an option. Could you tell me please what NFS packages shall be updated, so I can burn them on CD and bring to work. Thank you in advance, Alex On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, steve-ss wrote:

On Thursday 26 August 2004 17:42, Alex Daniloff wrote:

...

Hello SuSE folks,

...

Is something in SuSE9.1 screwed in terms of NFS? I can't update our eng. dept. linux boxes to SuSE9.1 until I solve this problem. May be somebody from SuSE can respond to these questions?

Our 9.1 NFS didn't work out of the box either until we YOU'd.

Try that first. HTH, Steve.

-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com

Today at 6:27pm, steve-ss wrote:

On Thursday 26 August 2004 18:06, Alex Daniloff wrote:

...

Steve, thank you for your response. Unfortunately, I have no direct connection to the internet at my workplace. So YOU is not an option. Could you tell me please what NFS packages shall be updated, so I can burn them on CD and bring to work.

Thank you in advance,

I think the NFS stuff is in the kernel apart from one patch:

ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/9.1/rpm/i586/util-linux-2.12-72.15.i586.patch.rpm

and the latest kernel is here: ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/update/9.1/rpm/i586/kernel-smp-2.6.5-7.104.i586.rpm

I hesitate to add my NFS problem to this thread, but it may be related, so here goes. I have a problem when attempting to edit NFS files exported from a Network Appliance file server to my 9.1 desktop. Whenever I try to edit a new file or an existing one with VIM (version 6.2.263), it complains that a swap file already exists. In fact, there _is_ a swap file, but it is apparently created during VIM's startup. No swap files are present prior to VIM starting. When I abandon the edit session, VIM also doesn't remove the swap files. I don't see this problem on NFS mounts on my 9.1 desktop to 8.0 systems, or from my old 8.0 system to the Network Appliance, or on local files. Has anyone experienced this? Thanks, Jim Cunning Here is a sample of what happens: jcunning@bigbear:/cmci/jcunning/test> echo "This is a test">test.txt jcunning@bigbear:/cmci/jcunning/test> ls -lF total 20 drwxrwxrwx 2 jcunning users 4096 2004-08-17 12:30 ./ drwxrwxrwx 12 root root 16384 2004-08-17 12:29 ../ -rwxrwxrwx 1 jcunning users 15 2004-08-17 12:30 test.txt* jcunning@bigbear:/cmci/jcunning/test> vi test.txt E325: ATTENTION Found a swap file by the name ".test.txt.swp" owned by: jcunning dated: Tue Aug 17 12:31:37 2004 [cannot be read] While opening file "test.txt" dated: Tue Aug 17 12:30:18 2004 (1) Another program may be editing the same file. If this is the case, be careful not to end up with two different instances of the same file when making changes. Quit, or continue with caution. (2) An edit session for this file crashed. If this is the case, use ":recover" or "vim -r test.txt" to recover the changes (see ":help recovery"). If you did this already, delete the swap file ".test.txt.swp" to avoid this message. Swap file ".test.txt.swp" already exists! [O]pen Read-Only, (E)dit anyway, (R)ecover, (Q)uit, (D)elete it: Q jcunning@bigbear:/cmci/jcunning/test> ls -lF total 20 drwxrwxrwx 2 jcunning users 4096 2004-08-17 12:39 ./ drwxrwxrwx 12 root root 16384 2004-08-17 12:29 ../ -rwxrwxrwx 1 jcunning users 15 2004-08-17 12:30 test.txt* -rwsrwsrwx 1 jcunning users 0 2004-08-17 12:39 .test.txt.swo* -rwsrwsrwx 1 jcunning users 0 2004-08-17 12:31 .test.txt.swp*

On Saturday 28 August 2004 19:45, Alex Daniloff wrote: What bug ... mine is working ok with the 2.6.5-7.104 kernel either udp either tcp especially with nfsv3.

Hello SuSE folks, For those who interested: The default SuSE kernel apparently has an NFS bug. Here is a practical solution which worked for me: 1. I've downloaded and compiled plain kernel 2.6.8.1 from kernel.org 2. Downloaded and installed new version of util-linux from kernel.org 3. In /etc/fstab for all nfs mounts I've added nfsvers=2 parameter. Now all remote NFS shares are mounted correctly on this box.

Alex

Probably you haven't seen my initial post and description of the problem. Here it goes: In a mixed manufacturing server/workstation environment of Linux, SUN, HPUX we had this particular problem with SuSE9.1 Pro. When we tried to mount remote NFS shares from HPUX servers, they appeared to be mounted over udp but empty. I mean mounted directories are visible but without any content. Remote NFS shares from other Linux and SUN servers were mounted correctly. Older versions of SuSE like 8.0/8.1 didn't have this problem. I search for the solution to overcome this problem on SuSE 9.1 we red this: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/ChangeLog-2.6.8.1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary of changes from v2.6.8 to v2.6.8.1 ============================================ [PATCH] Fix NFS client screw-up in fcntl f_op removal Fix stupid thinkos in the fcntl f_op removal code. Linux 2.6.8.1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- After loading and compiling plain 2.6.8.1 kernel and installing new util-linux, the problem with mounting HPUX NFS shares has gone. Now, read my posting below and tell me why it was a bad advise. Alex On Saturday 28 August 2004 11:38 am, steve-ss wrote:

On Saturday 28 August 2004 20:09, SuSE Ground Zero wrote:

...

On Saturday 28 August 2004 19:45, Alex Daniloff wrote:

What bug ... mine is working ok with the 2.6.5-7.104 kernel either udp either tcp especially with nfsv3.

...

Hello SuSE folks, For those who interested: The default SuSE kernel apparently has an NFS bug. Here is a practical solution which worked for me: 1. I've downloaded and compiled plain kernel 2.6.8.1 from kernel.org 2. Downloaded and installed new version of util-linux from kernel.org 3. In /etc/fstab for all nfs mounts I've added nfsvers=2 parameter. Now all remote NFS shares are mounted correctly on this box.

Alex

No. I don't agree either. Our 104 kernels are working fine. Not good advice.

<question> have I bottom posted? Am I correct in doing this? TIA </question> Steve.