/tech/ - Technology★

>>902025

nice drawing. I kekd

>>902008 (OP)

>>902008 (OP)

because every Linux man page documents some edge cased by the existence of NFS

You use, you lose.

>I've installed the NFS automounter on our system.

Be ready to LOSE. 

My experience with automount is that it repeatedly wedges
itself for no adequately explored reason and makes the
machine unusable until you reboot.  It's so annoying that we
have refrained from running automount (or amd, which suffers
similarly) on the GNU machines for years.  Bernard chose to
run amd on hal.gnu.one.two.thr, and half the time I try to
log into the machine it's completely wedged and unusable.  I
wish he'd turn the gd thing off.

I use eshell+TRAMP.

I don't give a shit about filesystems.

>>902025

This

>>902008 (OP)

Broken and insecure UNIXware.

>>902145

Something tells me that you don't realize exactly what NFS is and are under the impression that it's another ZFS/XFS/Btrfs.

Unencrypted traffic and no user authentication beyond using a whitelist.

>>902025

could be useful for small single-user deployments, but doesn't it have major issues with multiple people writing to the share at the same time? And some other shortcomings as well?

Because I have no current need for network filesystems, past having a Samba share so that my wife can drop files where she needs them.

If I did need a good network filesystem, I'd probably use something a little more robust than NFS, like Gluster.

Diskless state can happen in some processes.

>>902008 (OP)

because it sucks cocks