Re: [PATCH] rpc.nfsd: mount up nfsdfs is it doesn't appear to be mounted yet

["J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>]

On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:10:08AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> I was just pointing out that checking the return code from the system()
> call isn't sufficient. Because of the way most people have modprobe set
> up, it can return an error even though nfsdfs ended up being mounted
> anyway. Checking for the presence of the file after attempting the
> mount would be a more reliable test.
> 
> Assuming we're in agreement there, we have another question to
> settle...If the mount attempt fails, what should we do about it?
> 
> With my original patch, we fall back to using nfsctl(). You're
> suggesting that we should error out there. I'm not opposed to that, but
> it does mean dropping support for some really old kernels. It also
> means that we can remove some dead code in rpc.nfsd.
> 
> OTOH, the fallback might allow nfsd to keep working for some people.
> Maybe it would be better to just log a scary warning and fall back to
> using nfsctl() for now.
> 
> In a couple of releases, we could start returning an error there and
> rip out the legacy interface code, or compile it out by default and
> allow people to compile it in via a configure option?

Yes, let's just add the additional mount attempt for now, and figure out
what to do about the legacy interface as a next step.

--b.