(please excuse previous blank messsage) Hauke Fath <hauke%Espresso.Rhein-Neckar.DE@localhost> writes: >> Do you really have this working on any kind of solaris? Is there kernel >> support? > > not yet, and (according to > <http://marc.info/?l=linux-coda&m=124181000316589&w=2>), no. > >> Last time this came up I asked about that, and it seems it >> doesn't actually work. If the package doesn't actually work (fully, >> with kernel support), then I'd (as MAINTAINER) rather not have solaris >> patches, because they add update complexity and won't help. > > I can see your point. Arguably, the patches should go upstream - I see > you are currently trying to get them accepted. Definitely please do engage with upstream. Upstream is a few years behind coping with patches but is claiming they have a get-well plan :-) >> Arguably there should be ONLY_FOR_PLATFORM limited to NetBSD and Linux; >> I'm not aware of anything else working. > > I guess there is not much point in a server-only installation, given > that Coda has its own file store, so yes, this would have made a clear > statement... A server-only system is an interesting point that I hadn't considered. But, resolving server-server conflicts is done through venus. So I don't think it's a good idea to run a server without a venus. > OTOH, the sources are littered with '#ifdef sun' statements, so > nominal support is there; and if the sources at least build, that > might increase visibility of the project. The real issue is upstream, and there no one has a clue that anyone cares about coda on solaris. Thanks for backing out the patches. I would be happy if this actually worked and especially if they are rolled in upstream. But I believe there are 3 actual users of the netbsd coda package, and would be 0 of the solaris version. Let me know if I'm wrong :-)
Attachment:
pgpf6UEKQuv6F.pgp
Description: PGP signature