From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve Dickson Subject: Re: [PATCH] [nfs-utils: mountd] exports too verbose. Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:22:26 -0400 Message-ID: <45FA9A12.1030602@RedHat.com> References: <45F6CB05.6010604@RedHat.com> <17913.58996.50116.344398@notabene.brown> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: nfs@lists.sourceforge.net To: Neil Brown 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 1HSCOK-0000bn-Ke for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 16 Mar 2007 06:22:44 -0700 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1HSCOK-0001cg-F0 for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 16 Mar 2007 06:22:44 -0700 In-Reply-To: <17913.58996.50116.344398@notabene.brown> 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 Neil Brown wrote: > On Tuesday March 13, SteveD@redhat.com wrote: >> This patch is relative to the git tree at: >> git://git.infradead.org/~steved/nfs-utils.git >> which has been updated to the nfs-utils-1.0.12 >> release. >> >> Please consider... > > How about this instead... > nfs-utils imposes an ordering to some extent. hostnames first, then > subnets, the wildcards, then netgroups. > If the two names are in different places in that ordering, then there > really is no need to report anything, as in you case. > > OK? > > NeilBrown > > diff --git a/utils/mountd/cache.c b/utils/mountd/cache.c > index 6cf24ce..ed7fe35 100644 > --- a/utils/mountd/cache.c > +++ b/utils/mountd/cache.c > @@ -490,6 +490,7 @@ void nfsd_export(FILE *f) > int i; > char *dom, *path; > nfs_export *exp, *found = NULL; > + int found_type = 0; > > > if (readline(fileno(f), &lbuf, &lbuflen) != 1) > @@ -516,9 +517,10 @@ void nfsd_export(FILE *f) > continue; > if (strcmp(path, exp->m_export.e_path)) > continue; > - if (!found) > + if (!found) { > found = exp; > - else { > + found_type = i; > + } else if (found_type == i) { > xlog(L_WARNING, "%s exported to both %s and %s in %s", > path, exp->m_client->m_hostname, found->m_client->m_hostname, > dom); hmm... isn't there still a possibility that every time the mis-orders exported is accessed, the a message will be logged? So it might make sense to only log this message once, right? Also since this is a reordering problem, shouldn't the logged message say its a re-ordering problem, so people will know how to fix it? At this point, the message is stating the obvious... which is really not that helpful as to how to avoid the message... imho.. steved. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs