Re: OpenAFS port [was: OpenAFS on FreeBSD Progress (Works)]

As long as nothing conflicts with arla, I also suggest an all in one  
installation. Keeps it simple, which is always important.

Palle


13 dec 2008 kl. 03.27 skrev "Tony Jago" <[email protected]>:

> I think that we probably don't need more then one port. Yes, I know  
> I was the one what originally proposed the meta port but I have  
> changed my mind :) The reason we had a server and a client port  
> originally was that the server was the only bit working and the  
> kernel model was set not to compile. The client was was arla client.  
> Now that both the openafs server and client are supported by the  
> openafs team I can see no reason why it shouldn't be all in one  
> port. The port should have separate rc variable to allow the  
> administrator to only start the client or the server if they choose  
> to. openafs_client_enable="YES" and openafs_server_enable="YES" for  
> example. This gets around all the conflicting file problems. The  
> kernel module need only be loaded if the client is required. This  
> would seem to be a much easier and cleaner solution.
>
> My 2 cents,
>
> Tony
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-afs
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"